Why are flights out of Thailand dearer ?

[owl sees all]

1 hour ago, wgdanson said:

That depends on whether you are looking down from the North, or up from the South.

That's looking down from above the north pole.

 

It could be thought that if one stood exactly at the north pole, you would gradually turn 360 degrees in one day (24 hours). Not moving so fast you might think. But we are all moving incredibly quickly. All of us on earth are moving at over 1 million miles an hour.

 

Now back to the airplane charges. I think it's because of the time difference between the two directions. Obviously humans have a say in the prices. But ultimately the speed of the aircraft is insignificant in the bigger picture. Humans know this and simply take advantage of the situation.

Edited April 6, 2019 by owl sees all

[wgdanson]

16 minutes ago, owl sees all said:

All of us on earth are moving at over 1 million miles an hour.

Compared to what please? I am not moving relative to my armchair!

 

When an aircraft is flying in the air, the air is also moving relative to the Earth.

 

When Space X docked with the ISS, they were both going at 17500 mph relative to the Earth, but 2 or 3 mph, and eventually 0 mph,  relative to each other.

Edited April 6, 2019 by wgdanson

[Pilotman]

25 minutes ago, wgdanson said:

Compared to what please? I am not moving relative to my armchair!

 

When an aircraft is flying in the air, the air is also moving relative to the Earth.

 

When Space X docked with the ISS, they were both going at 17500 mph relative to the Earth, but 2 or 3 mph, and eventually 0 mph,  relative to each other.

he's pulling your leg mate. Either that, or he's messaging from the psychiatric ward. 

[owl sees all]

19 minutes ago, wgdanson said:

Compared to what please? I am not moving relative to my armchair!

 

When an aircraft is flying in the air, the air is also moving relative to the Earth.

 

When Space X docked with the ISS, they were both going at 17500 mph relative to the Earth, but 2 or 3 mph, and eventually 0 mph,  relative to each other.

Both you and your armchair are moving at over 1 million miles per hour (mph) compared with zero miles per hour from a point in space where the universe revolves. The further we get from this point, the faster we move.

 

Absolute zero mph cannot be achieved within our own galaxy.

 

"When Space X docked with the ISS, they were both going at 17500 mph relative to the Earth, but 2 or 3 mph, and eventually 0 mph,  relative to each other." I don't know what this has to do with air travel fares but I'll try to explain. If you have a bowl of water and put your hand in and swish it around fast. After a few seconds all the water molecules are racing around the inside the bowl at lets say 3 revolutions a second; except the molecule at the exact centre that simple turns through 360 degrees. The molecules of water are all moving, but as we get out to the side of the bowl (as opposed to the middle), they move faster.

 

 

[boriga]

Return flights, reversed, face the same geographic and atmospheric issues in each direction, just in a different order.

 

Price has nothing to do with cost.

 

Price is a result of supply and demand. Supply is pretty well fixed, (landing slots, route planning, high costs of cancelled flights), demand is the key variable. There is more demand from Asia so pricing is higher.

 

Try flying Shanghai to Hong Kong at Chinese New Year, compared with Shanghai to Hong Kong to Bangkok. The latter is cheaper, less demand.

 

Not immediately logical, but based upon demand it makes sense.

[PatOngo]

Deep down they just don't want us to leave but it would be a loss of face to admit it. Bless their kind little hearts!

[fantom]

As a previous poster said. (Apologies to the poster,couldnt get his id) It's the jetsream. These are high speed currents of air at high altitude. Commonly flying UK to Thailand is faster since the aircraft when it enters the west east stream is getting a kick along of about 100 mph.

That notice 'fasten seat belts may encounter turbulence' anticipates the slight turbulance as the aircraft enters, or leaves, the 100 mph stream.

Less time = less fuel = less cost, which is why it generally costs less UK to Thailand.

For those of a curious bent:

 

https://www.netweather.tv/charts-and-data/jetstream

[superal]

15 hours ago, Odin Norway said:

On some dates it can even be cheaper to buy 2 tickets and only use the flight you need.Make sure to ask the airline.Not really what the airline like but no charge for missing your flight. 

That is often the case with BA . Single fare more costly than a return

[baansgr]

Blame it on Carney...if Sterling was at its previous levels would be the same price....flights out of Thailand have hardly increased in 15 years, its just as you are on XE its become more expensive

[Rookiescot]

Flights from Thailand to the UK are uphill so use more fuel.

[owenm]

Supply and demand, seasonal changes and booking lead times will all affect prices regardless of destinations. 

 

I recently went to Melb return from Bangkok.. Thai and Jetstar were almost the same if taking checked baggage, food extras into account.. Thai was 14k Bht and Jetstar was 12k Bht plus extras that are included with Thai. This was for booking leaving in 3 wks.. On the return leg Jetstar was 5k Bht plus extras whereas Thai was 50% more.. 

 

If you can book 60-90 days in advance and check a site like Skyscanner you should be able to compare for the best valued flights on each leg.. 

[superal]

9 minutes ago, fantom said:

As a previous poster said. (Apologies to the poster,couldnt get his id) It's the jetsream. These are high speed currents of air at high altitude. Commonly flying UK to Thailand is faster since the aircraft when it enters the west east stream is getting a kick along of about 100 mph.

That notice 'fasten seat belts may encounter turbulence' anticipates the slight turbulance as the aircraft enters, or leaves, the 100 mph stream.

Less time = less fuel = less cost, which is why it generally costs less UK to Thailand.

For those of a curious bent:

 

https://www.netweather.tv/charts-and-data/jetstream

but we are talking about a round trip so there is no difference in flying conditions as both return flights will experience the same . 

It has to be an aircraft company seat costing thingy . BTW just seen Thai air selling one way from Thailand to Heathrow 15th May for 333 pounds . Now that has upset my post inquiry as that fare is maybe cheaper than the UK to Thailand one way .

Just to ask one further question , I often book one way as I do not want to be tied on specific dates . On the last couple of times at the check in desk at Heathrow I have been challenged as to why I do not have a return despite the fact that I show  them my pp and visa . Last time involved 3 check in staff until a supervisor cleared it .  

[1FinickyOne]

15 hours ago, wgdanson said:

So you mean there are more coming from UK to BKK than the other way round. I thought the number of folk staying in Thailand was going down. And tourists have to get back home.

based on the many complaints abt the drop in the value of the pound and the costs of visas, I assume many are walking back... 

[Tonyt00]

A simple question about air fares turns into something else, space x or whatever! And Finnair does not  fly the polar route to Thailand, but maybe to Japan. I think part of the price depends on the route and which air traffic control area they use. Not the same route, coming and going. As far as no shows, for the last ten years, or longer, seems the planes are always FULL. I have booked flights 3 months in advance and a week in advance, and almost always, the same results, Expensive, more or less. Now I book just one way, and then I can pick the return date that suits me.

[Postmaster]

How can you buy 2 tickets without paying for them ?

[donim]

1.Airport fees, 2.booking fees, 3.taxes, 4.currency conversions and 5.seats.

 

1. The airport fees seems higher at the port of departure (in return ticket) and lower for the return flight.
   Western and big airports here calculate higher airport fees compared to other smaller and eastern ports.
2. Fees booking, here for example booking ticket you can pay at 7eleven or any counter, fees never more then 100thb
   even paying with debit/credit card is not taking a lot.
   Booking in the west, many use agents who calculate booking fees 25 euros and additional services are added with extra fees. In counteraction, they offer easy payment service for those who doesn't have a credit card.
3. Taxes are depending on country where the ticket are bought, customer good taxes. In Thailand 7%. Countries in Europe calculate near the 20%
4. Conversion, depending on the airport carrier, if it differs from the country and currency, you loose some bits in currency converting.
5. The lower seats that are available, the higher the price will be. So is booking in advance cheaper, and the promotional seat prices will be gone. And many travel companies are booking the promotional seat prices for them but calculating normal prices for you.
   Depends on seasons, holidays, empty return flights have to be filled and these seats are cheaper. The same goes with connecting flights, on to the third hub (assuming that the departing port is the first hub) the plane can has many empty seats due the passengers went off at the second hub. Tickets from that second hub to the third are sold cheaper too, or just the price are not skyrocketing high before departing as the seat occupicance is known in the booking system.

 

Many factors.

 

Rgds,

[UTH001]

2 hours ago, boriga said:

Return flights, reversed, face the same geographic and atmospheric issues in each direction, just in a different order.

 

Price has nothing to do with cost.

 

Price is a result of supply and demand. Supply is pretty well fixed, (landing slots, route planning, high costs of cancelled flights), demand is the key variable. There is more demand from Asia so pricing is higher.

 

Try flying Shanghai to Hong Kong at Chinese New Year, compared with Shanghai to Hong Kong to Bangkok. The latter is cheaper, less demand.

 

Not immediately logical, but based upon demand it makes sense.

It only has to do with demand! If you look at fares to the UK in October (Oct 15 to 25, low season in both the UK and Thailand), Vietnam Air is the cheapest with Baht 22,835, followed by Oman Air with Baht 22,467 and Kuwait Airways with Baht 22,467. BA is 27,405, Thai Baht 28,075.

From London to Bangkok, the story is completely different. BA offers a very nice fare of Baht 17,001 (Baht 10,000 cheaper!), followed by Gulf Air with Baht 17,425 and SWISS with Baht 17,759. Thai is Baht 21,131. 

What does that all mean? Apart from supply and demand and airlines trying to charge as much as possible for each seat ("revenue management"), I cannot think of any other reason. Yip, we are definitely getting screwed by international carries, flying to Europe from Asia. 

The good news though: Flight to Australia (Sydney) are cheaper from Bangkok than from Sydney, at least something...

[Thomas J]

16 hours ago, owl sees all said:

It's all to do with the curvature of the earth. Going from east to west is faster than going from west to east. The Finlanders fly over the north pole so it's roughly the same both ways.

It has nothing to do with the curvature of the earth and the time it takes to fly.  Yes flight times can be different but having prices from BKK to almost everywhere that are as much as double the price to get from the same location is a pricing policy of the airlines.  Perhaps it has to do with load factors but that seems strange.  If you have full flights coming from Germany, the U.K. or Norway you should have full flights when those passengers return. 

[mosan]

17 hours ago, Odin Norway said:

On some dates it can even be cheaper to buy 2 tickets and only use the flight you need.Make sure to ask the airline.Not really what the airline like but no charge for missing your flight. 

I do something similar. When I'm in the US, I purchase round trip tickets from the US to Thailand and Back (Tampa-Bangkok-Tampa) even though I know I'm only going to use one leg of the ticket. The round trip ticket is $400 less than a one-way ticket.  

Edited April 6, 2019 by mosan
Clarity

[whaleboneman]

4 hours ago, wgdanson said:

That depends on whether you are looking down from the North, or up from the South.

It really doesn't matter if you're looking down from the North or up from the South - you'll never be able to see the guy at the equator.

[Griffo63]

It’s about competition. More people want to travel to Bangkok from UK and Europe (starting point) than want to travel from Bangkok (starting point)  to UK and Europe.   So airlines have to be competitive to fill planes

[tweedledee2]

13 hours ago, owl sees all said:

Mostly aircraft fly in an ark, and if they travel far enough; in a circle, The speed of an aircraft flying around the Equator will be very similar to an aircraft flying around the Capricorns. But a person, by simply walking, can walk around the earth much quicker*. The velocity makes all the difference.

 

* A person walking around the earth from east to west (clockwise**) does so quicker than walking from west to east (anti-clockwise).

 

** Looking down from space onto the north pole.

 

Atomic clocks are proof. I rest my case on this one.

 

   An ark? Isn't that what Noah built.  Your logic that if a person could walk East to West around the Equator it would take less time than walking West to East is a misconception on your part.   Anyone with any knowledge of basic math, some physics, but mostly common sense knows better. The Earths rotational speed has no effect on overland travel and limited effect on air travel. The circumference of the Earth at the Equator measures slightly less than 25,000 miles.  If a person could walk non-stop and maintain a 3 mph pace, by using math it would take just over 8,333.333 hours no matter which direction he walked, period. It's simply amazing how confused people are after researching on Wikipedia. 

[wgdanson]

42 minutes ago, whaleboneman said:

It really doesn't matter if you're looking down from the North or up from the South - you'll never be able to see the guy at the equator.

Not unless the World was FLAT!!!   LOL

[scubascuba3]

On the last couple of times at the check in desk at Heathrow I have been challenged as to why I do not have a return despite the fact that I show  them my pp and visa . Last time involved 3 check in staff until a supervisor cleared it .  

Yes sometimes they do query the return and if you have a visa, i think its because if you get denied entry they have to pick up the cost of flying you back if you can't pay

[petermik]

 

 

8 hours ago, whaleboneman said:

It really doesn't matter if you're looking down from the North or up from the South - you'll never be able to see the guy at the equator.

 

7 hours ago, wgdanson said:

Not unless the World was FLAT!!!   LOL

If the chap was tall and stood on a ladder you could see him then perhaps......????

[Odysseus123]

Wise old Owl bears the bell away on this one..even the Tralfamadoreans are laughing their tails off..

[brianbbb]

I always book flights with jetcost.com.uk book flights from the UK by booking from BKK to UK and UK to BKK by booking in UK bit cheaper 

[owl sees all]

45 minutes ago, tweedledee2 said:

 

   An ark? Isn't that what Noah built.  Your logic that if a person could walk East to West around the Equator it would take less time than walking West to East is a misconception on your part.   Anyone with any knowledge of basic math, some physics, but mostly common sense knows better. The Earths rotational speed has no effect on overland travel and limited effect on air travel. The circumference of the Earth at the Equator measures slightly less than 25,000 miles.  If a person could walk non-stop and maintain a 3 mph pace, by using math it would take just over 8,333.333 hours no matter which direction he walked, period. It's simply amazing how confused people are after researching on Wikipedia. 

I do not disagree. I was talking about walking around the world at the north pole.

[Chongalulu]

17 hours ago, KhunBENQ said:

Absolutely not recommenced to try this game.

Even skipping the last leg of a return flight is now followed up by airlines with civil action!

 

Typical example from my observations:

you can book a cheap return flight to a German airport via Zurich with SWISS (LH group).

The return flight to Zurich (only) is MORE expensive.

But don't expect that they would allow you to use the return from Zurich if you skipped the leg to Germany. No way.

An airline (Lufthansa?) recently brought an action against a customer for missing the last leg of his return flight. The airline lost the case.

Most airlines can and do legally cancel your return flight if you miss the outward leg. 

[KhunBENQ]

Just now, nchuckle said:

An airline (Lufthansa?) recently brought an action against a customer for missing the last leg of his return flight. The airline lost the case.

Yes, I think it was Lufthansa.