Transport Direct Thailand-US Flights Poised for Takeoff After 2015 Halt

[gk10012001]

My friend flew one of the Thai airways non stop flights from Los Angeles back when it was available.  17 hours non stop on a plane is just too much.  I have no problem making a stop in Taiwan and most of my trips to Thailand were on EVA, once or twice on China Air and they were from LAX ~12 hours of actual air time, 2 or 3 hour layover in Taiwan, then ~< 3 hours on to BKK.  I am OK with a break in between.  A few extra hours for the trip is preferable to 17 hours straight on a non-stop

[jas007]

2 hours ago, gk10012001 said:

My friend flew one of the Thai airways non stop flights from Los Angeles back when it was available.  17 hours non stop on a plane is just too much.  I have no problem making a stop in Taiwan and most of my trips to Thailand were on EVA, once or twice on China Air and they were from LAX ~12 hours of actual air time, 2 or 3 hour layover in Taiwan, then ~< 3 hours on to BKK.  I am OK with a break in between.  A few extra hours for the trip is preferable to 17 hours straight on a non-stop

The flights were listed as 17.5 hours, but sometimes they didn't really take that long. One time, on the way back to LAX, the plane must have caught a jet stream or something, as the flight only lasted about 13 hours.  That was great. 

[donx]

14 hours ago, TedG said:

How about IAD to BKK?

I'd love a direct flight from DC to Bangkok, but only if it takes no more than 14 hours. My wife doesn't like extremely long flights, but she also hates multiple stops, so I always have to find the best/cheapest one-stop flights without too much of a layover.

 

We will be travelling on Qatar Airways (our first time) at the end of July with a stop in Doha for 3 hours. Total travel time including the layover is 23 hours.

[TheAppletons]

Just now, Cameroni said:

So we'll get all the LA rioters to come to Thailand. Oh that's just wonderful. Grrrreaaat!

 

  Yes, that's exactly the conclusion one would reach after reading the OP.  

[TedG]

1 minute ago, donx said:

I'd love a direct flight from DC to Bangkok, but only if it takes no more than 14 hours. My wife doesn't like extremely long flights, but she also hates multiple stops, so I always have to find the best/cheapest one-stop flights without too much of a layover.

 

We will be travelling on Qatar Airways (our first time) at the end of July with a stop in Doha for 3 hours. Total travel time including the layover is 23 hours.

It's going to be about 16 hours or more.  I've taken the direct flight from EWR to SIN.  It's about 18 hours. 

[fobuff]

18 hours ago, Pouatchee said:

when will there be direct flights to canada?... never i guess

There's one from Vancouver 

[grumpyoldman]

6 hours ago, gk10012001 said:

My friend flew one of the Thai airways non stop flights from Los Angeles back when it was available.  17 hours non stop on a plane is just too much.  I have no problem making a stop in Taiwan and most of my trips to Thailand were on EVA, once or twice on China Air and they were from LAX ~12 hours of actual air time, 2 or 3 hour layover in Taiwan, then ~< 3 hours on to BKK.  I am OK with a break in between.  A few extra hours for the trip is preferable to 17 hours straight on a non-stop

100% agree. Stretch the legs walking around, eat some noodle soup, use a toilet that isn't a mini closet, wash up a bit.

 

I prefer that minibreak, before going on.

[Jonathan Swift]

The big question is will they be priced competitively? I typically spend about $600.00 ine way

[hydraides]

7 hours ago, gk10012001 said:

My friend flew one of the Thai airways non stop flights from Los Angeles back when it was available.  17 hours non stop on a plane is just too much.  I have no problem making a stop in Taiwan and most of my trips to Thailand were on EVA, once or twice on China Air and they were from LAX ~12 hours of actual air time, 2 or 3 hour layover in Taiwan, then ~< 3 hours on to BKK.  I am OK with a break in between.  A few extra hours for the trip is preferable to 17 hours straight on a non-stop

BKK TO LA should not be 17 hours, more like 14-15 hours max, HKG To LA is only 13 hours and BKK is 2 hours from HKG but 

[waders123]

A direct flight from Seattle to Bangkok? That would be amazing—can’t wait to see it happen!

[bkk_mike]

10 hours ago, Srikcir said:

Only to undergo ICE/Immigration scrutiny at US destination? 

I do not believe that they will be bound by any overseas pre-flight US immigration review, especially when US based ICE/Immigration apparently must meet a high quota of entry rejections of foreigners to appease the Trump administration. 

Preflight checks tends to be at airports in places like Ireland and Bermuda, where there tends to be no issues with immigration anyway.

Has the advantage that it allows for flights into LaGuardia from Bermuda, for example, as LaGuardia doesn't have enough space for immigration.

[2long]

20 hours ago, Pouatchee said:

 

it aint direct if youre in montreal, so no... no joke

Vancouver was in Canada the last time I checked.

You wrote "when will there be direct flights to canada?... never i guess" but didn't specify your preferred city.

[2long]

Considering the distance, and the amount of people that the can attract to pay, I feel a one-stop flight is always the best option.

I find Emirates hard to beat.

I'm in the UK and came on EVA, who I love.

[nauseus]

10 hours ago, jas007 said:

I just looked up what I paid for my one way flight on United in 2022, which I took just about as soon as I could once they opened up travel to Thailand with no restrictions.

 

Airfare:1105.00 USDU.S. Transportation Tax:19.70 USDJapan Passenger Security Service Charge:4.00 USDJapan Passenger Service Facilities Charge:7.90 USDThailand Processing User Charge:1.00 USDThailand International Departure Fee:0.40 USDInternational Surcharge:114.60 USDSeptember 11th Security Fee:5.60 USDU.S. Passenger Facility Charge:9.00 USDTotal Per Passenger:1267.20 USDTotal:1267.20 US.

 

That was for a one-way ticket.  Phoenix to San Francisco in Economy, San Francisco to Korea in Premium Economy, and Korea to Bangkok in Economy. And believe it or not, after pricing what Delta wanted for the same  type of service, the cost was a real bargain.  I'm not sure what Delta was thinking back then, but I wasn't going to pay $3300 for a one-way ticket to Bangkok.  So I became a United customer.  

 

Korea?

Japan Passenger Security Service Charge:  😒

[nauseus]

38 minutes ago, waders123 said:

A direct flight from Seattle to Bangkok? That would be amazing—can’t wait to see it happen!

 

THAI used to do it but there was a pit stop.

[soi3eddie]

3 hours ago, fobuff said:

There's one from Vancouver 

Did Vancouver to Bangkok on Air Canada in February this year. 15 hours in the air. Not bad at all. Very happy. 

 

[Suetape]

MCO-BKK.  That way you could drop off the wife and kids at Disney World and they won't even know your missing.  

[Luuk Chaai]

22 hours ago, jas007 said:

For what it's worth, I took some of the old direct flights back when they were still operating. I've been on both the JFK-BKK flights and the LAX-BKK flights. The first time I flew in 2006, it was from JFK and they took the polar route. At the time, they were using the Airbus A340-500?  Something like that. Anyway, the Premium Economy seats were well worth the price.  The last time I flew on one of those trips was BKK-LAX. That was 2010 or 2011. I don't remember what plane they used for that flight.  Again, Premium Economy is the way to go.  

 

An interesting detail:  On one of the BBK-JFK flights, I spent almost 17 hours talking to this guy, who was in the seat next to me:

 

 

 

 

 

2008  JFK to BKK  on Thai Air ... was a great fight and great service..   and yes.. the polar route... 

and I believe I caught the last direct flight they offered back to JFK and that was June 2008 

 EVA ,,NY to Taiwan/ Taoyuan then BKK  or  Singapore Air ... NY to Singapore / Changi then BKK  are good.. 

 stay clear of Cathay Pacific..  (it's all about the class of people  ..  or should I say ..  lack of class )

but.... to go direct  that's a game changer ! 

[jerrymahoney]

15 hours ago, Cameroni said:

So we'll get all the LA rioters to come to Thailand. Oh that's just wonderful. Grrrreaaat!

Of Course(TM) Soros will pay for their tickets.

[jas007]

59 minutes ago, Luuk Chaai said:

 

2008  JFK to BKK  on Thai Air ... was a great fight and great service..   and yes.. the polar route... 

and I believe I caught the last direct flight they offered back to JFK and that was June 2008 

 EVA ,,NY to Taiwan/ Taoyuan then BKK  or  Singapore Air ... NY to Singapore / Changi then BKK  are good.. 

 stay clear of Cathay Pacific..  (it's all about the class of people  ..  or should I say ..  lack of class )

but.... to go direct  that's a game changer ! 

I'm not sure about the last direct flight back to JFK being 2008. Maybe it was.  I'm sure, though, that I did the LAX-BKK route non stop well after 2008.  Several times. 

[jas007]

4 hours ago, nauseus said:

 

Korea?

Japan Passenger Security Service Charge:  😒

I was mixed up.  It was Japan.  The time I switched planes in Korea was on another trip.  

 

Sort of the same, though. A short layover. No big deal. 

[gk10012001]

10 hours ago, grumpyoldman said:

100% agree. Stretch the legs walking around, eat some noodle soup, use a toilet that isn't a mini closet, wash up a bit.

 

I prefer that minibreak, before going on.

Yes and some times I have accsess to the lounge and take a quick shower, etc..

[placnx]

On 6/12/2025 at 5:48 AM, TedG said:

How about IAD to BKK?

There was a BKK-JFK flight many years ago. It took 18 hours. Maybe the fuel cost was too much, but Singapore Airlines has a flight to New York.

[Evil Penevil]

I took the nonstop Thai NYC-BKK flight during its first week of service in 2005 and then three or four times a year until it was canceled in 2008. It was indeed a great flight, the best possible way to get from the east coast of the U.S. to Thailand.  It had a convenient departure time (noon if I remember right) and arrived at four in the afternoon rather than late at night. Return times for BKK were similarly convenient- departure at midnight and arrival at JFK at 7:00 a.m. More than once  after a Thailand trip I went directly from JFK to my office. The nonstop flight gave visitors more time to enjoy Thailand than any other flight option.  

 

However, the BKK-JFK nonstop never proved as popular as Thai had hoped.  It failed to attract enough of the full-fare business class passengers who provided most of the revenue.  After about six months the BKK-JFK service was cut from six days a week to four.  Only one of the 11 flights I took out of JFK was completely full, although several to JFK had been.  The chatter on Flyer Talk in 2008 was Thai canceled the service because it failed to hedge against surging jet fuel prices, which made the route unprofitable even if it  every flight would have sold out.

 

 

[ronnie50]

On 6/12/2025 at 7:06 PM, jas007 said:

The flights were listed as 17.5 hours, but sometimes they didn't really take that long. One time, on the way back to LAX, the plane must have caught a jet stream or something, as the flight only lasted about 13 hours.  That was great. 

Flying in an easterly direction is usually faster than the other way. Yes, it's the jetstream I believe that gives the plane a tailwind - sometimes a very big one.