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

[Upnotover]

1 hour ago, BLMFem said:

Did the BKK-LAX/LAX-BKK a few times with THAI while it was available and always hated it. While I generally prefer flying direct, flights up to 17.5 hours are just too long.

So went back to making a pit stop in Japan.

Me too, many times.  Those planes were bad and had that nasty flat but not horizontal business class seat that you slid down the whole flight.  Going was bearable, returning dreadful.  Things will be better this time round I'm sure.

[BLMFem]

6 minutes ago, Upnotover said:

Me too, many times.  Those planes were bad and had that nasty flat but not horizontal business class seat that you slid down the whole flight.  Going was bearable, returning dreadful.  Things will be better this time round I'm sure.

I'm sure they will. The comfort these days is so much better in the new planes. And yes, those business class seats on THAI were rock hard, and the pitch was not much more than what you get in premium economy these days. Still remember flying on the 2nd floor of the 747 quite fondly, though. It was bearable as we got that pit stop in Japan.

 

[MarkBR]

Avoid Boeings, way too many accidents 

[0ffshore360]

On 6/12/2025 at 2:51 PM, spidermike007 said:

One can only hope this is the case as direct flights to Los Angeles or New York would be fantastic. The thing that comes to mind is number one how reasonable will they be, and number two will they ever happen? I know they're being studied at this point but that doesn't mean that the airlines are going to determine that there is sufficient demand. 

Discount price inbound to the US, inflated price to escape?

[Oliver Holzerfilled]

2 hours ago, MarkBR said:

Avoid Boeings, way too many accidents 

 

United will fly Boeings on these routes.  Have you communicated your findings to the US and Thai aviation authorities?  They would be very interested to see the data to support restricting Boeing or any other unsafe aircraft.  

[daejung]

On 6/12/2025 at 9:51 AM, spidermike007 said:

One can only hope this is the case as direct flights to Los Angeles or New York would be fantastic. The thing that comes to mind is number one how reasonable will they be, and number two will they ever happen? I know they're being studied at this point but that doesn't mean that the airlines are going to determine that there is sufficient demand. 

Out of curiosity, since there haven't been any direct flights to the U.S. for the past 10 years, which other airport do travelers go through?

[spidermike007]

19 minutes ago, daejung said:

Out of curiosity, since there haven't been any direct flights to the U.S. for the past 10 years, which other airport do travelers go through?

The most convenient connections are through Taipei, Seoul, Osaka and Tokyo. Some also transit through Hong Kong. 

[ronnie50]

3 minutes ago, spidermike007 said:

The most convenient connections are through Taipei, Seoul, Osaka and Tokyo. Some also transit through Hong Kong. 

I've done all of those. My vote is Tokyo or Osaka to break up the journey. I didn't like Taipei because the airport sucked, regardless of whether flying China Air or EVA - nothing was open airside. But I think they have a newer airport now. Perhaps better. HKG is good for Cathay Pacific (which is a good airline - One World partner), and a good airport, but you're looking at a 12-14 hour onward flight from there. They also have this annoying habbit of not boarding by zone or rows like other airports, so if you're in economy class you could end up in a line/queue that runs for hundreds of meters. By the time you get on, there's no overhead storage left. 

[spidermike007]

1 minute ago, ronnie50 said:

I've done all of those. My vote is Tokyo or Osaka to break up the journey. I didn't like Taipei because the airport sucked, regardless of whether flying China Air or EVA - nothing was open airside. But I think they have a newer airport now. Perhaps better. HKG is good for Cathay Pacific (which is a good airline - One World partner), and a good airport, but you're looking at a 12-14 hour onward flight from there. They also have this annoying habbit of not boarding by zone or rows like other airports, so if you're in economy class you could end up in a line/queue that runs for hundreds of meters. By the time you get on, there's no overhead storage left. 

The few times I have flown on ANA, I must say I really enjoyed the lounges in Japan, and it's an excellent airline. I usually fly EVA, so I transit through Taipei and admittedly the lounge in Taipei is not very exciting (unless you fly business class or have diamond status) but it's relatively direct, though a very long flight from LA to Taipei. I do agree Taipei is not an exciting airport, though it's likely better than it was the last time you were there, and it is fairly easy to pass a couple of hours there,

[spidermike007]

19 hours ago, Oliver Holzerfilled said:

 

United will fly Boeings on these routes.  Have you communicated your findings to the US and Thai aviation authorities?  They would be very interested to see the data to support restricting Boeing or any other unsafe aircraft.  

Boeing's are very safe Jets and I never feel the slightest bit uneasy flying on them, a lot of Boeing incidents have been on their 737s. Of course we have no answers yet for the recent crash in India, but it was the first incident with the 787. 

 

With nearly 100,000 commercial flights a day worldwide, one has to expect a few incidents here and there. Airline travel is still ridiculously safe. You certainly have the right to avoid Boeing, I'm sure it won't affect them much one way or the other. 

 

In 2023, Boeing planes were involved in more U.S. safety incidents than Airbus, but it’s worth noting that they also have a larger fleet. In 2021, Airbus had a higher number of reported incidents.

 

https://www.stratosjets.com/blog/airbus-vs-boeing-safety/

 

Boeing aircraft have a lower frequency of crashes per million flights compared to Airbus, with Boeing having a rate of one crash per 184 million flights and Airbus having a rate of one crash per 081 million flights.

 

According to the data, the number of flights has been increasing, but the number of accidents has been decreasing each decade.The latest generation of aircraft, which includes models from both Airbus and Boeing, have the lowest accident rates. 

 

https://www.mightytravels.com/2024/04/comparing-airline-incident-rates-a-factual-analysis-of-boeing-vs-airbus-safety-records/

 

 

[JimmyJake]

8 minutes ago, ronnie50 said:

I've done all of those. My vote is Tokyo or Osaka to break up the journey. I didn't like Taipei because the airport sucked, regardless of whether flying China Air or EVA - nothing was open airside.

Taipei is not so bad these days.  Lots restaurants and shops, but a bit crowded sometimes.  I really like the fact that if you are flying from the US and transiting there, you never have to go through security there.