New Air Canada link from Vancouver to Bangkok an aviation first, will boost American arrivals

[webfact]

On Saturday, Minister of Transport, Saksayam Chidchob, revealed that Thailand saw 1.89 million arrivals in November, an increase of nearly 160% on the 10 monthly average up to that point.

 

by Carla Boonkong & Pranee O' Connor

The new direct 13-hour flight from Vancouver to Bangkok is a first for Air Canada and Thailand which is trying to regain its position as a power travel hub in Southeast Asia after the kingdom was hit hard by the sudden closure of its air space caused by the pandemic and the unpredictable nature of its reopening process while larger airlines prioritise more profitable routes and hubs such as Singapore.

Air Canada became the first international airline to fly non-stop from North America this week when it launched its Vancouver to Bangkok service which promises to open up a new and badly needed gateway to travellers moving between Canada, the United States and Thailand. It comes as Thailand notched up 1.89 million arrivals in November, up nearly 16% on October and a full 159.94% more than the average this year as the foreign tourism industry finds its feet again for the high season.

 

On Thursday, Air Canada inaugurated its first flight from Vancouver to Bangkok in what has been hailed as the first nonstop flight connection between North America and Southeast Asia.

 

Full story: https://www.thaiexaminer.com/thai-news-foreigners/2022/12/04/air-canada-vancouver-to-bangkok-is-a-first/

 

-- © Copyright Thai Examiner 2022-12-05

 

- Cigna offers a range of visa-compliant plans that meet the minimum requirement of medical treatment, including COVID-19, up to THB 3m. For more information on all expat health insurance plans click here.

 

Monthly car subscription with first-class insurance, 24x7 assistance and more in one price - click here to find out more!

[d4dang]

good news for Air Canada customers

[Captain Monday]

Glad to hear of the service.

 

Nobody will choose to go to Thailand because the can transit in Vancouver.

The problem with non stop NA to BKK service is a leisure market the yields have been are to low to justify deploying B787/A350 vs other destinations where full fare business class tickets can be sold consistently at high load factors.

 

Hope it works out better this time.

[arick]

It's only flying a few times a week and a few months a years. 300 passengers x 3 x 12 weeks  equate equate to a lot of extra people in arriving & Americans??? 

[alex8912]

The flight from Vancouver to BKK is 16  to 16 1/2 hours. More bad reporting.  
There simply aren't enough people to travel this route even in high season. It will fail. The Thai air New York City to BKK and even Los Angeles to BKK flight should be started again. They were always filled and the airplanes have become more modern and light weight since these routes seized operation. I heard in the past that it's cargo that really makes the $$ on these routes but maybe the new planes can carry more now. I for one prefer a non stop 17 hour flight from New York to Bangkok. Singapore air does daily 18 hour flight NYC to Singapore with no economy seats. Just premium economy and Business. Thai air or someone else should follow this model. Singapore air prices for premium economy are excellent. 

[Blumpie]

That is a long long long time to be on a plane.  Yikes!  And yes it IS 16 hours, I imagine the way back would be 12.  The headwind causes you to get there much later.  

[ChrisY1]

Good move by Air Canada....it certainly shows confidence for tourism in Thailand.

[koolkarl]

Just read pages and pages of reviews on Trip Advisor about Air Canada.

I would rather take a boat.

[Srikcir]

1 hour ago, alex8912 said:

The flight from Vancouver to BKK is 16  to 16 1/2 hours. More bad reporting.  
There simply aren't enough people to travel this route even in high season. It will fail. The Thai air New York City to BKK and even Los Angeles to BKK flight should be started again. They were always filled and the airplanes have become more modern and light weight since these routes seized operation. I heard in the past that it's cargo that really makes the $$ on these routes but maybe the new planes can carry more now. I for one prefer a non stop 17 hour flight from New York to Bangkok. Singapore air does daily 18 hour flight NYC to Singapore with no economy seats. Just premium economy and Business. Thai air or someone else should follow this model. Singapore air prices for premium economy are excellent. 

From the US West Coast:

ANA SeaTac to BKK (one stop) 19h45m

China Airlines Los Angeles to BKK (one stop) 20h5m

China Airlines San Francisco to BKK (one stop) 18h45m

 

A 16h flight from Vancouver (assuming correct flight time vs. 13h) is time competitive even if one had to fly from Seattle to Vancouve (1h) for a connection. But additional cost, US ground time, etc. to connect with Air Canada may be negative factors.

 

Personally, I prefer one-stop (3h or less) for some physical freedom, some preferred/fun food, duty shopping, etc. 

[Paradise Pete]

1 hour ago, Blumpie said:

That is a long long long time to be on a plane.  Yikes!  And yes it IS 16 hours, I imagine the way back would be 12.  The headwind causes you to get there much later.  

yes. Just under 16 hours to BKK, Just over 13 hours return. A bit pricey for economy, but that travel time is so much better than other options.

 

 

[mikebell]

25 minutes ago, koolkarl said:

Just read pages and pages of reviews on Trip Advisor about Air Canada.

I would rather take a boat.

Read what people say about Finnair's Cattle Herding journeys.

[bamnutsak]

Sounds like a bit of a "long-haul" experiment?

 

The flight will be operated four times per week, with one flight departing YVR every Monday, Wednesday, Friday, and Sunday. The journey will take an estimated 16 hours. The service is a seasonal offering and is scheduled to terminate in April.

 

 

And that AC could get a landing slot/ground service at SBIA -  I do not believe they flew their own metal to THL previously. relying on code-shares - and that they could not get one at SIN, a far more lucrative market.

 

Unless you live in Vancouver you're looking at one-stop service anyway, so a bit a higher-priced novelty.

 

I flew BKK-JFK direct, non-stop on TG (A340-500) back in the day, and it was long, even in J (not lie-flat). Might have been ~ 17 hours all in? I think there was a "morgue" on the aircraft, just in case.

 

 

 

 

[Matthew Peter]

It's cuz 3,000 Canadian teachers are moving to Thailand to try to improve the deplorable state of Thai teaching (an oxymoron). Gotta have a ready route for the them to get to Thailand, and for the disappointeds to return to Canadaland.

[alex8912]

1 hour ago, Srikcir said:

From the US West Coast:

ANA SeaTac to BKK (one stop) 19h45m

China Airlines Los Angeles to BKK (one stop) 20h5m

China Airlines San Francisco to BKK (one stop) 18h45m

 

A 16h flight from Vancouver (assuming correct flight time vs. 13h) is time competitive even if one had to fly from Seattle to Vancouve (1h) for a connection. But additional cost, US ground time, etc. to connect with Air Canada may be negative factors.

 

Personally, I prefer one-stop (3h or less) for some physical freedom, some preferred/fun food, duty shopping, etc. 

You couldn't pay me enough to fly China airlines on a long haul flight.  Also with the times you quoted I bet some of the layovers are just an hour or so. If your first flight is a little late you may not make the second flight. From the east coast Boston and NYC have similar flight times maybe about 21 hours going 19 1/2-20 going back with a layover. I did Cathay BOS to Hong Kong ( 15-151/2 hour) then Hong Kong to BKK ( 2 ish hours ) several times. There is something about just getting there that I find attractive. I always have an aisle seat to get up and walk around. Emirates going the other way was great but now they have less flights Dubai to BKK. I agree with you the international transfer when doing Seattle to Vancouver is not convenient at all. You must have to enter Canada go through customs get your bags then get to possibly another terminal , check your bags again, go through Canadian customs again and wait for flight. A lot of wasted time. 

[alex8912]

42 minutes ago, bamnutsak said:

Sounds like a bit of a "long-haul" experiment?

 

The flight will be operated four times per week, with one flight departing YVR every Monday, Wednesday, Friday, and Sunday. The journey will take an estimated 16 hours. The service is a seasonal offering and is scheduled to terminate in April.

 

 

And that AC could get a landing slot/ground service at SBIA -  I do not believe they flew their own metal to THL previously. relying on code-shares - and that they could not get one at SIN, a far more lucrative market.

 

Unless you live in Vancouver you're looking at one-stop service anyway, so a bit a higher-priced novelty.

 

I flew BKK-JFK direct, non-stop on TG (A340-500) back in the day, and it was long, even in J (not lie-flat). Might have been ~ 17 hours all in? I think there was a "morgue" on the aircraft, just in case.

 

 

 

 

That flight was awesome!  No morgue. You def don't want to do Singapore -JFK the longest flight in the world at 18 hours. Just did that each way in March and April. The flight was great and slept a lot and that was premium economy. 

[Fujionrye]

I'm taking this tomorrow. Long flight but it's great not having to transfer. Potential delays prevents booking transfer flights too close together so always ended up with a big lay over somewhere. Last spring took 35 hours, 3 transfers to get to Edmonton.

[alex8912]

1 hour ago, Paradise Pete said:

yes. Just under 16 hours to BKK, Just over 13 hours return. A bit pricey for economy, but that travel time is so much better than other options.

 

 

That amount is insane for economy!  
I'd rather take much longer fly Turkish Air Vancouver to Istanbul to Bkk and do a night or two in a hotel in Istanbul ( cheap and way more comfortable than Business class ) and do the same the way back. See an incredible city each way or just sleep a lot. Probably $1500 ish including Istanbul hotel. $2580!!! Come on! I'm sure Cathay with one connection in Hong  Kong was much cheaper than that but they might not be running yet. 

[wwest5829]

3 hours ago, Blumpie said:

That is a long long long time to be on a plane.  Yikes!  And yes it IS 16 hours, I imagine the way back would be 12.  The headwind causes you to get there much later.  

March we are scheduled to fly BKK-ICN, ICN-ATL. I figure 24 hours total time including the 2 hour plane switch at ICN. At 75, I am thinking it may well be my last trip to the homeland. 

[KhunBENQ]

3 hours ago, Blumpie said:

That is a long long long time to be on a plane.  Yikes!  And yes it IS 16 hours, I imagine the way back would be 12.  The headwind causes you to get there much later.  

It's 13:05 by schedule.

Reporting is still bad by using the number for the return flight.

787-9 not everyone's dreamliner 

[alex8912]

11 minutes ago, Fujionrye said:

I'm taking this tomorrow. Long flight but it's great not having to transfer. Potential delays prevents booking transfer flights too close together so always ended up with a big lay over somewhere. Last spring took 35 hours, 3 transfers to get to Edmonton.

From Edmonton this new flight MIGHT be worth the extra $$$. 35 hours!! OMG.  Tomorrow you'll be in Thailand so fast you might not even need to watch a movie!  Good luck. I heard the return flight BKK to Vancouver is even shorter. I love it when the Europeans on here complain about their flight to BKK when most of them can get here non stop in 10/12 hours! 

[alex8912]

4 minutes ago, KhunBENQ said:

It's 13:05 by schedule.

Reporting is still bad by using the number for the return flight.

787-9 not everyone's dreamliner 

It's 15 hours and 55 minutes by schedule. . Someone somewhere made the 13 hour flight mistake. 
it is IMPOSSIBLE for a commercial flight to fly from Vancouver to Bangkok in 13 hours!!!

https://www.google.com/search?q=flight+ac65&rlz=1CDGOYI_enTH791TH826&oq=flight+ac65&aqs=chrome..69i57j0i22i30j0i390l2.9943j0j4&hl=en-US&sourceid=chrome-mobile&ie=UTF-8

[pegman]

3 hours ago, Blumpie said:

That is a long long long time to be on a plane.  Yikes!  And yes it IS 16 hours, I imagine the way back would be 12.  The headwind causes you to get there much later.  

Headed east the return is 13h5m. Last time I went non-stop was 18h plus a 24h mechanical delay L.A.-BKK on ThaiAir. Vancouver is my preferred routing to Thailand so I hope it is still running when I'm ready to travel.  

[sqwakvfr]

3 hours ago, alex8912 said:

The flight from Vancouver to BKK is 16  to 16 1/2 hours. More bad reporting.  
There simply aren't enough people to travel this route even in high season. It will fail. The Thai air New York City to BKK and even Los Angeles to BKK flight should be started again. They were always filled and the airplanes have become more modern and light weight since these routes seized operation. I heard in the past that it's cargo that really makes the $$ on these routes but maybe the new planes can carry more now. I for one prefer a non stop 17 hour flight from New York to Bangkok. Singapore air does daily 18 hour flight NYC to Singapore with no economy seats. Just premium economy and Business. Thai air or someone else should follow this model. Singapore air prices for premium economy are excellent. 

I think you are correct because from YVR to NRT is about 10 hours.  LAX to SIN nonstop is about 16 hours.  The distance is over 8500 Nautical miles.  Probably only two aircraft can make this type of journey nonstop(A350-900 ULR or a Boeing 787-10).  Also, due to the amount of fuel required to make this nonstop journey means a lower passenger load and less cargo.  This will mean less revenue per flight.  

 

In 2007 I did the Thai Air nonstop from LAX to BKK and back twice.  The flight was conducted on an older A340-500.  The aircraft was about 50% full due to the fact that maximum fuel load was needed to fly nonstop for 15 to 16 hours.  This flight had a great premium economy section.  

[Stargeezr]

Even if this is used only 6 months per year. I like the idea, as with all the lost luggage stories, if your suitcase gets on at Vancouver

there is a big chance it will reach Bangkok. I will try it at least once to see how the experience goes.

[CANSIAM]

Very very very long flight to be on with AC flight attendants..........goodluck 

[Fujionrye]

11 minutes ago, CANSIAM said:

Very very very long flight to be on with AC flight attendants..........goodluck 

AC isn't bad. BKK to ICN Asiana Air had no service. Just water lol.

[d4dang]

Air Canada could improve their inflight service by letting Tim Hortons take over economy class service and catering. Snacks from Dollarama

BTW has Air Canada ever had cold beer in economy on flights to Tokyo?

[Bangkok Barry]

4 hours ago, alex8912 said:

The Thai air New York City to BKK and even Los Angeles to BKK flight should be started again.

I think you'll find that the US banned THAI as their maintenance doesn't meet US standards.

[soi3eddie]

2 hours ago, Srikcir said:

A 16h flight from Vancouver (assuming correct flight time vs. 13h) is time competitive even if one had to fly from Seattle to Vancouve (1h) for a connection. But additional cost, US ground time, etc. to connect with Air Canada may be negative factors.

 

Personally, I prefer one-stop (3h or less) for some physical freedom, some preferred/fun food, duty shopping, etc. 

Good news for North Americans coming to Bangkok/Thailand. Definitely a leisure and lifestyle route - can't see it beeing full of business fare paying passengers.

 

As for travel convenience then yes! A short flight and connection to Vancouver then the long haul uninterrupted to Bangkok is definitely a better option than doing say 12+ hours from Seattle to Tapei, 6 hour layour then 4 hours onwards to Bangkok. I did this EVA premium in 2017 and the final leg was totally miserable. Far better to relax/sleep on the trans-pacific all the way to Bangkok. Also, for those with Star Alliance, Air Canada would be attractive for mileage accrual/redemption.

 

 

 

[hotchilli]

8 hours ago, webfact said:

Air Canada became the first international airline to fly non-stop from North America this week when it launched its Vancouver to Bangkok service which promises to open up a new and badly needed gateway to travellers moving between Canada, the United States and Thailand.

A direct flight, so why would it stop in US ?