International Airlines Threaten To Boycott Thailand

[robsamui]

I've come into this tread late - but can somebody tell me something that I've wondered for a long while ...

Is there anything WRONG with Don Muang? Why did Thailand need to spend 5 million dollars on something that they'd already got?

Just think about it - one hundred and sixty thousand MILLION baht.

Just think what the nation could have done with this. New books, computers and teachers. University sponsored schemes to educate students abroad so they get proper post-grad experience. More hospitals, doctors and susbisided treatments.

Oh - no I was forgetting.

The LAST thing that the rich Thais want to do is to help the other 95% of their countymen.

Far better to make a useless project that gives everyone concerned a backhander, looks GREAT to other nations for a while - but then falls apart. Every other nation sighs, raises their eyes and says "Thailand!" knowingly.

Thank God the Skytrain was not built by the Thais!

Rob

[johnsonspot]

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.

The only problem Denver had was its automated luggage system that was eventually scrapped. The airport there never had safety concerns other than falling asleep from having to drive almost to Kansas to get to the terminal.

[wintermute]

I've come into this tread late - but can somebody tell me something that I've wondered for a long while ...

Is there anything WRONG with Don Muang? Why did Thailand need to spend 5 million dollars on something that they'd already got?

The airport cost 5 Billion dollars and the whole hackneyed plan was to make Thailand an "air hub" of Asia. The problem is the airport itself doesn't have much more capacity than Don Muang. A lot of money was spent on a relatively inefficient and as we now know..flawed design.

Just think about it - one hundred and sixty thousand MILLION baht.

Just think what the nation could have done with this. New books, computers and teachers. University sponsored schemes to educate students abroad so they get proper post-grad experience. More hospitals, doctors and susbisided treatments.

Nations like Thailand rarely spend their money on actual human capital or infrastructure where it's needed. The ideas have to pass from the top down and there is little public debate or voting on projects that are actually required. Whether a project gets a greenlight or not is based entirely on its margin of profit for those in charge. This airport project was corrupt from the beginning and there have been so many hands dipping into the pot it's hard to say who is to blame for the mess. Thaksin may have initiated it but I think this was a joint catastrophe involving more than just one person.

The LAST thing that the rich Thais want to do is to help the other 95% of their countymen.

Which is why the phrase "Thai rak Thai" is such a joke and why Thai nationalism is nothing but a farce to keep the sheep in line.

Far better to make a useless project that gives everyone concerned a backhander, looks GREAT to other nations for a while - but then falls apart. Every other nation sighs, raises their eyes and says "Thailand!" knowingly.

It's sort of like everything else in Thailand it's designed to look nice but underneath it all there is little substance or quality.

Edited February 18, 2007 by wintermute

[pete_r]

If the international carriers feel the new airport is safe then it probably much safer than we are all led to believe and all the hype to the contrary is PR spin. Are there problems - sure are - is it unsafe not a bit.

On that note, I seem to have missed the detailed pictures of the cracks when they were released. The story has been going on for three weeks now, and I've only seen two rectangle holes in the tarmac (one empty, one full of water), photographed from different angles and repeated again and again. Both have been dug by workers. Where are the actual cracks, and how big are they, really?

[littlebritain]

Would you want to help the Thai's make a botch job on repairing the runway and knowing that in years to come, when it sinks you are going to get all the blame ?

Let them get on with it .

[Ricardo]

Airlines threaten to boycott Thailand

BANGKOK:

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 Australian 2007-02-17

Purely from an international carrier point of view, why is it not acceptable to split operations between DM and Suvarnabuhmi airports, but it is acceptable to split operations between Gatwick and Heathrow?

Probably because those UK-airports have approx 3 times the number of passengers , passing through them, so load-factors would be better ?

And many international carriers choose to fly only from LHR, not both airports, just as in BKK they would prefer to only use the main airport.

[LivinLOS]

Everybody unhappy about old and new airports. I am fine as I love the trains.

What time does the train for New York leave again ??

[lukamar]

If the international carriers feel the new airport is safe then it probably much safer than we are all led to believe and all the hype to the contrary is PR spin. Are there problems - sure are - is it unsafe not a bit.

On that note, I seem to have missed the detailed pictures of the cracks when they were released. The story has been going on for three weeks now, and I've only seen two rectangle holes in the tarmac (one empty, one full of water), photographed from different angles and repeated again and again. Both have been dug by workers. Where are the actual cracks, and how big are they, really?

The cracking has been reported by a non Thai runway engineer as not being a problem and is no worse than cracking at other major international airports. All runways have cracks in them, they even have quite wide expansion joints about 3- 4 inches. It could be a problem if the runway was heaving but no reports from within or outside Thailand have reported that type of problem.

I've also seen the pictures of the holes and they were definitely jackhammered out. Taxiways are traditionally less thick than runways and I have not seen a decent picture of what is reported as the rutting. The one picture I saw of a taxiway looked more like it had a resurfacing machine run over it before the picture was taken and may have been under repair. Planes do not crash on taxiways no matter how uneven they are.

[Johpa]

I've come into this tread late - but can somebody tell me something that I've wondered for a long while ...

Is there anything WRONG with Don Muang? Why did Thailand need to spend 5 million dollars on something that they'd already got?...

Rob

The short answer was there was nothing wrong with Don Muang. It was only in the 1990s that the last major expansion and the completion of the elevated expressway to that airport were completed. It would have been easy to expand Don Muang further by relocating the Thai Air Force (RTAF) from the east side of the runways. That land could have been used for either an expanded Domestic terminal or the relocation of cargo to that side. And removing the RTAF golf course built between the two runways may have allowed for the building of a third runway. But far more money to skim off of public funds is to be had by building a new airport in a location that had no existing infrastructure.

But for many of the neo-sahib ex-pat posters here, as long as the business class lounges are well staffed and functioning, they are quite pleased with the new airport.

[brianw]

Oh well Isuppose us business class will have to fly to singapore and make the 3 day trip on the singapore/ thai blue train to bangkok Oh what a awful thought

[dotcom]

The spokesman said the decision would ease heavy air traffic at Suvarnabhumi by 17 per cent.

--TNA 2007-02-17

You're kidding right? The new airport is overcrowded?

And since when are projects priced in Aussie dollars? Get a grip.

[endure]

The spokesman said the decision would ease heavy air traffic at Suvarnabhumi by 17 per cent.

--TNA 2007-02-17

You're kidding right? The new airport is overcrowded?

And since when are projects priced in Aussie dollars? Get a grip.

Since the original report was from an Australian newspaper.

[hardy1943]

I just flew in with AirAsia CIE-BKK and spend 4 1/2 hours there and checked out every floor

and nook and cranny ,they may have some problem with the runway some where, I found it

one of the beautiful and convienient airports I have ever visit and it was not crowed it was

beautiful and well organised and I picked up my daughter which came from the US

and she said custom great and effient. It was like a breath of fresh air getting away from that

dingy Don Muang which I absolutly hated.Like every new airport it has is problem but they will

ironed out in a few month.All I can tell you I was pleasantly surprised.

[Scott]

I've been here awhile and have worked for a Thai boss for close to 10 years now. I've had contact with several companies and now have a deeper understanding of how/why things go wrong.

First, Thai bosses (in general) are always right. Even if they are way out of their area of expertise. Employees, invariably, do not dare speak up or tell them the flaws in their plan. I've seen this happen over and over again. Even as a foreigner, when I have spoken up to point out "the obvious." I've been told to keep my mouth shut and stay out of it and in no uncertain terms.

An affiliated company recently built a new building. The firm has a lot of engineers, so it was designed really well and every phase of construction was under the watchful eye of a lot of engineers with time on their hands. The building is beautiful. The bosses daughter decided that her office isn't big enough and said she wanted the wall moved. This is a big (I think 6-7 storey bldg.) It is a load bearing wall and can't be moved without severely compromising the structural integrity and safety of the building.

They tried to talk her out of it, but she told her father they were being impolite. My guess is that millions of baht will be spent to move a necessary wall. In 10, 15, or 20 years when the building collapses, no one will remember what happened or why.

The PM in charge is the same thing. They need to have qualified people in charge of repairs/maintenance--not politicians!!

This stuff happens all the time--then add corruption to it and you have a lethal mix.

[Levent]

You're kidding right? The new airport is overcrowded?

And since when are projects priced in Aussie dollars? Get a grip.

Suvarnabhumi is designed to handle 45 million passengers per year initially. When it took over from Don Muang, the latter was already handling that amount. It will take quite some time before Suvarnabhumi is expanded to handle more passengers (additional runway, new terminal...)

[lukamar]

The PM in charge is the same thing. They need to have qualified people in charge of repairs/maintenance--not politicians!!

Problem is the PM isn't a politician. At least a politician is answerable at some point to his/her constituents. He's military and appointed and only answers to the guy at the top General S. who pulls all the strings no matter what they are all telling you.

[iang]

QUOTE(Phil Conners @ 2007-02-17 16:15:07) 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

BKK-SIN flight time is definetly 2hrs 20mins..!(takeoff to landing by stopwatch)

Because of the one(1) hour time difference between singapore & thailand, you "lose" an hour travelling eastbound, and "gain" an hour travelling west, (in respective local times).

I think what's confusing people with flying times to / from Singapore (aside from the time difference) is the difference between the 'block time' of 2 hours 10 minutes to 2 hours 20 minutes and the 'flying time' of about 1 hour 50 minutes.

The 'block time' is the scheduled duration of the flight from the push back from the departure gate, to the arrival at the gate in Singapore. This includes the time required for the push back, the time to taxi to the runway, a few minutes holding time, waiting for the take off, the time to taxi from the runway in Singapre to the arrival gate etc. Once in the air, subject to prevailing headwinds / tailwinds, they will announce that the 'flying time' - being the time actually spent up in the air, is 1 hour 50 minutes. The two are not the same.

[markokang]

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)

Yeah I agree, may stop some of the corruption (as a one time offer) if he stands over the lot of them tapping his toes. Sure there's a million other ways to do it but when you have a mob of angry airlines threatening to boycot your country... best step up and say hey I will personally get it done (oversee it at least)