george Posted February 17, 2007 Share Posted February 17, 2007 Airlines threaten to boycott Thailand BANGKOK: -- International airlines have threatened to stop flights into Thailand if they are forced to move from the new international Suvarnabhumi gateway back to the old Don Muang airport. Board of Airline Representatives president Brian Sinclair-Thompson, speaking for more than 60 carriers, said last night: "Some members are going to review their commitment to continue their services from Thailand if they are forced to split operations to serve two airports.'' The threat effectively forced the hand of Thailand's military government, which has been besieged by problems surrounding the new $A7 billion gateway, opened last September as a replacement for the 90-year-old Don Muang facility. Prime Minister Surayud Chulanont has announced he will personally take over the handling of problems related to Suvarnabhumi after the pull-out threat was made to Transport Minister Theera Haocharoen at a meeting with top foreign airline officials in Bangkok. Gen Surayud told the Bangkok Post that fixing Suvarnabhumi's problems - including numerous cracks on runways and taxiways as well as design flaws at the main terminal - was now among the top priorities of the interim government. In addressing the airport's problems, his government would keep in mind that it must protect national interests and ensure passenger safety. A high-level meeting has been called for today by the committee on operating policies for Suvarnabhumi and Bangkok airports. Gen Surayud is expected to rubber-stamp the Transport Ministry's recommendations on the future of the two airports after a briefing on conditions at Suvarnabhumi by teams that have examined the problem-plagued airport. It is now known that 71 flights by only three domestic carriers - Nok Air, One Two Go and some Thai Airways services - will resume from Don Muang on March 25. The consortium which built Suvarbabhumi claimed yesterday the new airport's design met with all the requirements of the terms of reference it had signed with Airport of Thailand (AOT). But the Murphy Jahn/TAMS/ACT (MJTA) consortium admitted yesterday the design had been modified during construction to cut costs, and said it was confident that the new airport was safe enough for all passengers and staff working in the facility. Wanchai Wimuktayon, managing director of ACT Consultants Co, which is part of the MJTA, promised his company would clarify 31 out of 61 construction-related problems in the area of airport design at a press conference to be held on February 21. He was confident, however, that all the problems could be fixed and the repairs would not require the airport to be completely closed. --The Australian 2007-02-17 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
george Posted February 17, 2007 Author Share Posted February 17, 2007 Foreign airlines reject move to Don Muang including Thai Airways, All Nippon Airways, Austrian Airlines, Asiana Airlines, Lufthansa, Scandinavian Airlines, Singapore Airlines, Swiss International Air Lines and United Airlines BANGKOK: -- International air carriers have rejected calls to move some of their flights back to Bangkok’s old airport at Don Muang to ease congestion while repairs are carried out at the new airport, saying they preferred Suvarnabhumi as the main hub. Meanwhile, the key aviation committee, chaired by Prime Minister Surayud Chulanont, resolved Friday to keep Bangkok’s new airport open during repairs to its cracked taxiways and runways. The committee was informed by the Transport Ministry that although numerous cracks appeared on most of the taxi areas, the taxiways and the runways had experienced minor damage as underground water in the sand layer under the tarmac caused subsidence and cracks on the surface. Yongyuth Mayalarp, Thai government spokesman, told a press conference that the damage would not pose safety risks to aircraft taking off and landing at the new airport. “Part of the west runway and the taxiways would be closed for repairs between two weeks and two months depending on the scale of the problem. We do not have to shut down the entire facility,” Mr Yongyuth said. Problems to the terminal building such as the roof-top lighting system and the faulty air bridges were classified as “not critical”. Repairs were ongoing and would be completed soon, he added. According to the spokesman, almost all 60 airlines said during a meeting Friday that they would prefer to keep all their flights at Suvarnabhumi as they wanted to see the facility as Bangkok's sole international aviation hub. The meeting was called to discuss the government plan to operate two international airports for Bangkok. A total of only 71 domestic and charter flights without international connections, operated by just three carriers -- Nok Air, One Two Go and some Thai Airways services - will begin flying out of Don Muang next month, six months after the 90-years-old airport closed to commercial traffic. The spokesman said the decision would ease heavy air traffic at Suvarnabhumi by 17 per cent. Nine airlines affiliated with Star Alliance that fly into and out of Bangkok daily - including Thai Airways, All Nippon Airways, Austrian Airlines, Asiana Airlines, Lufthansa, Scandinavian Airlines, Singapore Airlines, Swiss International Air Lines and United Airlines - will all continue to operate from the glossy new showcase airport, built on former swampland at a cost of almost US$4-billion over 10 years. It was opened in September last year. They called on the government to draw up a long term airport development plan with fully-integrated transport links between the two airports if it intended to reactivate Don Muang as a second hub for Bangkok. --TNA 2007-02-17 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drummer Posted February 17, 2007 Share Posted February 17, 2007 How do you like THEM apples? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SeanBangkok Posted February 17, 2007 Share Posted February 17, 2007 Why doesnt he find someone who is familiar with this sort of thing and appoint them to run it. what does he know about the airport, or is it that famous thai logic that since he is the guy incharge, he is the most capable to handle any problem? it seems like one bad stoy after another chasing this interim government. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mai Krap Posted February 17, 2007 Share Posted February 17, 2007 Wow, just when it looked like a Don Deal! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drummer Posted February 17, 2007 Share Posted February 17, 2007 Why doesnt he find someone who is familiar with this sort of thing and appoint them to run it. what does he know about the airport, or is it that famous thai logic that since he is the guy incharge, he is the most capable to handle any problem?it seems like one bad stoy after another chasing this interim government. Thats what he DID!! Really, the guy will not be doing it all by himself, like you make it out to sound. And taking matters into his own hands like this puts a lot of pressure on the officials involved to get it done right, and without any funny stuff (at least a minimum of funny stuff) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ray23 Posted February 17, 2007 Share Posted February 17, 2007 (edited) Well if these airlines want to operate out of it they must think it is safe. Could imagine the expense involved in completly relocating in the first place. Now let just do it again. Maybe they should have waited and let Uncle Tox take all the heat Edited February 17, 2007 by ray23 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gummy Posted February 17, 2007 Share Posted February 17, 2007 Just a case of uping the anti and brinkmanship to either sqeeze a hefty amount of compensation or a concession on landing fees I would then expect to hear from those airlines that it was not a monetary consideration at all but based upon operating efficiency whist the new airport undergo its repairs and even perhaps upgrade ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapfries Posted February 17, 2007 Share Posted February 17, 2007 Well if these airlines want to operate out of it they must think it is safe. ================================================================ It's remarkable that nobody has ever brought up the slight detail called "Airline Insurance Liability". It is my understanding that the large underwriters of this world (there aren't many) carry he insurance for plane, crew and contents. Somewhere in the fine-print of these elaborate policies, features a clause which refers to the proper and dully established certifications with reference to the various airports where these carriers land and take-off from. I believe that the very moment the FAA 'vetoes' the new Bangkok Airport (for obviously very sound reasons) than the entire argument is going to be very shortlived. As ususal; in this entire sage, the whole thing boils down to $$$$$: if the airlines have to revert back to Don Muang, then this is going to be one heck of a big expense to these carriers. Logic would dictate, that the State would have to fit the bill. Of course; the State doesn't want to fit this horrendous bill. Hence this little vicious circle we are now foinding ourselves in. Hope the new PM can get the lead out and the various lazy/arrogant butts into gear, otherwise, overseas visitors to Thailand will have to land in, say Singapore and simply hop the train to Bangkok. This would be of great interest to the seperatists in "The South" ~ read: nice juicy new targets . . . . . . . . Everything is inter-related ~ interesting ain't it ? ? ? ? Meanwhile; Thaksin is studying the "Kangaroo-Style" of governing . . . . . thus deserving the new nick-name: "THE HAPPY HOPPER" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ray23 Posted February 17, 2007 Share Posted February 17, 2007 I'm sure they have had a lot of engineers and lawyers evaluating this before they made thier statement. The liablity exposure is just to high not to take all that into consideration Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wintermute Posted February 17, 2007 Share Posted February 17, 2007 Hope the new PM can get the lead out and the various lazy/arrogant butts into gear, otherwise, overseas visitors to Thailand will have to land in, say Singapore and simply hop the train to Bangkok. This would be of great interest to the seperatists in "The South" ~ read: nice juicy new targets . . . . . . . . It'll be hilariously ironic if this airport debacle ends up increasing the international airline profit in Singapore and Malaysia. They were supposed to be competing with those countries but they may just end up handing over business to them because of sheer incompetence. Personally, I wouldn't mind taking a short hop from Singapore to Don Muang. It's only a little over an hour away by one of the smaller airlines and the flight is usually pretty cheap. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jrincon17 Posted February 17, 2007 Share Posted February 17, 2007 Hope the new PM can get the lead out and the various lazy/arrogant butts into gear, otherwise, overseas visitors to Thailand will have to land in, say Singapore and simply hop the train to Bangkok. This would be of great interest to the seperatists in "The South" ~ read: nice juicy new targets . . . . . . . . It'll be hilariously ironic if this airport debacle ends up increasing the international airline profit in Singapore and Malaysia. They were supposed to be competing with those countries but they may just end up handing over business to them because of sheer incompetence. Personally, I wouldn't mind taking a short hop from Singapore to Don Muang. It's only a little over an hour away by one of the smaller airlines and the flight is usually pretty cheap. its a good thing they opened it early , only in thailand. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thaigene2 Posted February 17, 2007 Share Posted February 17, 2007 Why doesnt he find someone who is familiar with this sort of thing and appoint them to run it. what does he know about the airport, --------- or is it that famous thai logic that since he is the guy incharge, he is the most capable to handle any problem? ------ it seems like one bad stoy after another chasing this interim government. Yup. That's sounds about right.. The longer I live here, the clearer it becomes how easy it was for a certain group of people, in such a short time (a few generations)to get so rich by exploiting a passive gullible indigenous population -- by taking over the bureacracy and doing deals between families, by doing dirty litle deals between themselves, by cooking up half baked ideas for public works projects that weren't needed - only to enrich temselves by skimming and replacing the parts with cheaper ones...it just never, never stop... But leave it up to me "I'm the Phooyai" I will fix it.." and get a bit richer of course in the process..ahem. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Axel Posted February 17, 2007 Share Posted February 17, 2007 .... Personally, I wouldn't mind taking a short hop from Singapore to Don Muang. It's only a little over an hour away by one of the smaller airlines and the flight is usually pretty cheap. Make that 2 hours 20 min. SIN - time is one hour ahead of BKK. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Greer Posted February 17, 2007 Share Posted February 17, 2007 I think that as one of the carriers talking about the boycott would be SQ, then in that case they would be simply dropping their flights altogether to Bangkok, and I very much doubt that they would jeopardise their landing rights in that way. This is why they are talking as a group. I have used the airport quite a lot and to be really honest, I haven't seen anything of the problems quoted by others in this and other forums. I have seen the reports and photographs of the cracks, and OK, they exist of course and need to be repaired. I would suggest that the company that built the airbridges would have had to put some form of warranty in place so repairs will not cost the governement cash outlay, but of course there is the lost revenue from tourists or others not wishing to come due to all the negative publicity. There are definitely things that need to be fixed, but apart from those well known issues with the building and runways etc, I think much of the rest of the hoo-ha is probably associated with the usual problems that airports face when newly opened. I am not saying it is acceptable practice, but I am saying that the minor hiccups are just that. The major issuues are the building construction problems and those involving the runways and taxiways - those must be fixd properly of course! I applaud the governement for at least trying to move to sort out the issues and get things straightened away. The Prime Minister is at least taking the bull by the horns, whereas the previous governement would simply have muzzled the press...no more stories...problem solved! By the way, it is 1hr 45 minutes flight from KL to BKK, and a bit more from Singapore...around 2hrs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paulmw Posted February 17, 2007 Share Posted February 17, 2007 How do you like THEM apples? And what were the airlines told in july last, when they didn't think the Airport was ready & the big hike in landing charges by the boss of AOT. IF YOU DON'T LIKE IT GO ELSE WHERE!!. Paul Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wrecker Posted February 17, 2007 Share Posted February 17, 2007 I sincerely enjoy this. The airforce probably already spent thee money they thought they would make from landing and parking fees ass well from the ground services. It is an ill intended decision, just to fill the coffers of the army which owns Don Muang. If an airport neeeds JUST 40 million dollars in repairs, there is very little of a problem. But in the haste to show the world how bad Thaksin was, they started a blame game, it shows the incompetence of this people. If you accuse Thaksin of unsound decisions economically and personally, why do you appoint Somkid, he was the architect of the economic policies. This stinks, I would like to know howw long they can keep on folling the people. if they were serious in healing devisions they should have handled this differently and would have sand Sondhi to China were he can complain about press freedom again, instead of giving him a tv show. To be continued, I would say... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil Conners Posted February 17, 2007 Share Posted February 17, 2007 It'll be hilariously ironic if this airport debacle ends up increasing the international airline profit in Singapore and Malaysia. They were supposed to be competing with those countries but they may just end up handing over business to them because of sheer incompetence. Personally, I wouldn't mind taking a short hop from Singapore to Don Muang. It's only a little over an hour away by one of the smaller airlines and the flight is usually pretty cheap. Incompetence alone probably couldn't have done it. They'd also need a large helping of corruption to get where they are today. And btw, Axel, Spore is still only an hour and a half away, even if they are in a different timezone Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gummy Posted February 17, 2007 Share Posted February 17, 2007 Best buy shares in Thai then if they are going to be the only carrier landing in Thailand Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Axel Posted February 17, 2007 Share Posted February 17, 2007 (edited) And btw, Axel, Spore is still only an hour and a half away, even if they are in a different timezone Thanks Phil, I am regularly on either CX or TG. 2 hrs 20 min. Who is faster? CX712 SIN 13:50 BKK 15:10 02:20 hrs Thai Airways Intl (TG 404) dep: 12:25 - Singapore (SIN) terminal 1 arr: 13:45 - Bangkok (BKK) terminal Edited February 17, 2007 by Axel Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mike uk Posted February 17, 2007 Share Posted February 17, 2007 i dont remember any problems when they built the new airport in hong kong and that was built out at sea Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maestro Posted February 17, 2007 Share Posted February 17, 2007 But the Murphy Jahn/TAMS/ACT (MJTA) consortium admitted yesterday the design had been modified during construction to cut costs... That’s what I heard from other sources over the past months. ...and said it was confident that the new airport was safe enough for all passengers and staff working in the facility. I believe it will take more than 40 million Baht worth of repairs to keep it “safe enough” -- Maestro Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
reddove Posted February 17, 2007 Share Posted February 17, 2007 Well, Thailand does not need the Tourism anyway. You can take boats, Buses, Tuk Tuk, Motor taxi's, bick's, or even walk into Thailand. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hotgeekus Posted February 17, 2007 Share Posted February 17, 2007 Anywhere you build something that has 40 million people passing through it is bound to run into some problems. Flown out of it, yes. Perfect, no. I am glad someone made them open it when they did, as if they didn't open it so early, it would be the same old poop, just a while later. If they pushed the opening back for 6 months, the only difference would be that the runway would need to be fixed August 2007 instead of now. The problems didn't start last week, this airport has been planned for 40 years (ya, right). System in LOS is this way, 'why spend a dollar when 25 cents will get it done?'. Well, now we know..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peter48 Posted February 17, 2007 Share Posted February 17, 2007 What is happening to this wonderful country called Thailand ; seemingly its been one thing after another ....and did you know The Times in the UK mentioned the other day the risks now of buying Thai property in the face of its uncertain and changing circumstances .... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ray23 Posted February 17, 2007 Share Posted February 17, 2007 Well lets face it guys Denver sure had it's problems and I think truthfully that is the norm. It's only the safety issues that are really important now. I just can't see an airline taking that chance. One that after another in Thailand really it has always been that way. But, most of it was not seen. today it operates under a international microscope. These problem really existed prior to the current government. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yamaharr1 Posted February 17, 2007 Share Posted February 17, 2007 Isn't this funny the PM is going to handle this personally. There have been people killing each other in the South and bombs in Bangkok with a total of over 2000 deaths and he hasn't done a ###### thing except chase Thaksin around, go figure take away his money and boy o boy he is ready to help. Just another politician worried about how he is going to pay for his cars and meer Noi, Geb, and luong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Levent Posted February 17, 2007 Share Posted February 17, 2007 And btw, Axel, Spore is still only an hour and a half away, even if they are in a different timezone So which airline do you fly with? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sing_Sling Posted February 17, 2007 Share Posted February 17, 2007 And btw, Axel, Spore is still only an hour and a half away, even if they are in a different timezone So which airline do you fly with? I take this trip almost weekly . . . scheduled flying time 2.20 hours. Whichever airport they decide on - - - <deleted>, take a stand and repair the new one asap, drain the water and get on with it instead of looking like total rank amateurs yet again and again and again. It seems everything the g'ment touches turns into a PR disaster, if only they would have stuck with their original professionalism. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lost_in_space Posted February 17, 2007 Share Posted February 17, 2007 thaigene has a good point: "The longer I live here, the clearer it becomes how easy it was for a certain group of people, in such a short time (a few generations)to get so rich by exploiting a passive gullible indigenous population -- by taking over the bureacracy and doing deals between families, by doing dirty litle deals between themselves, by cooking up half baked ideas for public works projects that weren't needed - only to enrich temselves by skimming and replacing the parts with cheaper ones...it just never, never stop..." I'm wondering that in the age of globalization, they are not going to get away with this stuff as much as in the past. When it starts affecting not just an indigenous population, but certain parts of the international community, there will be new prices to pay. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.png.3b3332cc2256ad0edbc2fe9404feeef0.png)
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now