Is It Safe To Fly Thai Airways International ?

[think_too_mut]

So you're comparing ALL air travel with the Japanese train system, probably the most advanced and highly used in the world? How many fatalities have there been on trains in Thailand, India or indeed even Britain in the past year? More than 0, that's for sure...

No, only Japanese train and air travel. 13 accidents with fatalities were only for air crashes in Japan contrasted to zero of Shinkansen's.

The fact that airplanes are statistically the safest mode of travel doesn't even matter if you factor TIME into it.

That's what I am arguing here: that "fact" has been parroted for decades. The Japanese example that I gave tells the contrary. Shinkansen and air travel are comparable here:

- by distance : Tokyo - Osaka is most flown and trained strech. Shinkansen is quicker (and more expensive) to take you Tokyo-Osaka door to door (550km takes 2hrs 28 minutes) than an airline

- by equipment: Boeings are comparable to state of the art Shinkansens, We are not comparing overcrowded rickety wrecks with people hanging off all sides, even standing on the roof, as in India.

- by frequency: Shinkansens leave every 3-6 minutes. At any moment of operation (not between 24-06am) there could be 100 Shinkansens between Tokyo and Osaka, similar in number of aircrafts.

Then we have 30 years of spotless service by Shinkansen against 13 deadly crashes of the airlines.

Same country, same people, same discipline, same habits.

[North]

Well,

It is nice to see a lot of response to my original post and thank you for that BUT:

I am really not interested in the Emirates and japanese highspeed trains !

My question was: Is It Safe To Fly Thai Airways International ?

Did you notice the button to the right of the button " add reply" ?

It is called " New Topic ", and you are welcome to use that button to create a new topic to discuss these matters.

thank you.

North

[think_too_mut]

Over the same period, there were 13 air crashes with fatalities in Japan, including the largest single plane accident in aviation history (JAL 123 that killed 520 people).

And how many died in traffic accidents in that time?

You still haven't shown us anything more than hysterical rantings so don't tell us about education.

You really have problems with comprehension and multi-dimensional thinking. So much so that you are in a derogatiry loop, this what you have said so far:

Rubbish

Absolute rubbish

Old woman at hairdressers

Hystrerical ranting

Who is losing his marbles here?

What did you say as your evidence? I am not going to think for you.

So far, looks like trains are safer than airplanes. Air traffic may not be the safest.

You look more like a deer stunned in headlights when someone is dispersing a myth that you have been religiously repeating for who knows how long.

[cdnvic]

If you want to cherry pick statistics you'll always manage to find what you want. Try comparing Air and Rail in a much broader sample. I could do the same and say that not only is Westjet an airline with no fatalities, but it hasn't even had anyone commit suicide in front of one of it's 737s. So therefore air travel must be safer than a Japanese train.

Or you can just admit you made a ridiculous, almost trollish statement with nothing to back it up except for a very narrow example to had to construct in order to look less foolish.

[cdnvic]

You really have problems with comprehension and multi-dimensional thinking. So much so that you are in a derogatiry loop, this what you have said so far:

Rubbish

Absolute rubbish

Old woman at hairdressers

Hystrerical ranting

I stand by it. The evidence is in your posts. (and that's not a loop, it's a path, as nothing repeats )

Edited September 23, 2007 by cdnvic

[think_too_mut]

If you want to cherry pick statistics you'll always manage to find what you want. Try comparing Air and Rail in a much broader sample. I could do the same and say that not only is Westjet an airline with no fatalities, but it hasn't even had anyone commit suicide in front of one of it's 737s. So therefore air travel must be safer than a Japanese train.

Or you can just admit you made a ridiculous, almost trollish statement with nothing to back it up except for a very narrow example to had to construct in order to look less foolish.

You did not read it. Or I am right about your comprehension problems.

[cdnvic]

National Transportation Safety Board (USA) Stats ending 2006:

1.3 deaths per hundred million miles travel by car

1.7 deaths per hundred million miles travel by aircraft

Edited September 23, 2007 by cdnvic

[stevenjm]

Over the same period, there were 13 air crashes with fatalities in Japan, including the largest single plane accident in aviation history (JAL 123 that killed 520 people).

And how many died in traffic accidents in that time?

You still haven't shown us anything more than hysterical rantings so don't tell us about education.

You really have problems with comprehension and multi-dimensional thinking. So much so that you are in a derogatiry loop, this what you have said so far:

Rubbish

Absolute rubbish

Old woman at hairdressers

Hystrerical ranting

Who is losing his marbles here?

What did you say as your evidence? I am not going to think for you.

So far, looks like trains are safer than airplanes. Air traffic may not be the safest.

You look more like a deer stunned in headlights when someone is dispersing a myth that you have been religiously repeating for who knows how long.

Now your saying "So far, looks like trains are safer than airplanes". why aren't you comparing it against an airline with good safety record instead of just picking that one or why aren't you comparing with a different train that has not had good safety.

Why don't you get statistics for train tragedies against statistics for air tragedies if your going to make that argument and not just choose one that has had the luck of nothing yet.

Here - train tragedies on indian pacific (an thats one train mind you) in australia vs Quantas (hundreds of aircraft) in Australia.

Trains lose.

[SteveH]

After the 1-2 -Go plane crash in Phuket there has been many speculations and rumours about flight safety or lack of same in Thailand / Asia. Speculations concerning "company culture", but also speculations about the Thai authorities and their ability / willingness to perform their task to ensure, that the airlines follow the rules set up for safe operations of flights.

In the last few years I mostly have been flying with Thai Airways from Europe to Thailand, but all these speculations have made me think of, if I should switch to a western airline like Lufthansa, SAS, Finnair, Austrian Airlines, Swiss, simply for safety reasons?

I would like to hear your opinions, specially opinions from people working with aviation in Thailand / Asia

I am mostly interested in aspects concerning international flights, since I last year made the decision not to fly domestic flights anymore.

North

I used to work for a Company resposible for Thai line maintenace, they were as good as most International carriers, much better than some.

[dominique355]

National Transportation Safety Board (USA) Stats ending 2006:

1.3 deaths per hundred million miles travel by car

1.7 deaths per hundred million miles travel by aircraft

Are you sure, Vic? No typing error here? That would mean that car travel is safer, right?

Or do I misunderstand these figures?

[cdnvic]

National Transportation Safety Board (USA) Stats ending 2006:

1.3 deaths per hundred million miles travel by car

1.7 deaths per hundred million miles travel by aircraft

Are you sure, Vic? No typing error here? That would mean that car travel is safer, right?

Or do I misunderstand these figures?

How many people travelling in the average car, and how many in the average airliner?

[jumnien]

That statistic was for aircraft, not airliners.

[cdnvic]

That statistic was for aircraft, not airliners.

and minivans as well as cars but how nitpicky are we going to get?

[Goshawk]

After the 1-2 -Go plane crash in Phuket there has been many speculations and rumours about flight safety or lack of same in Thailand / Asia. Speculations concerning "company culture", but also speculations about the Thai authorities and their ability / willingness to perform their task to ensure, that the airlines follow the rules set up for safe operations of flights.

In the last few years I mostly have been flying with Thai Airways from Europe to Thailand, but all these speculations have made me think of, if I should switch to a western airline like Lufthansa, SAS, Finnair, Austrian Airlines, Swiss, simply for safety reasons?

I would like to hear your opinions, specially opinions from people working with aviation in Thailand / Asia

I am mostly interested in aspects concerning international flights, since I last year made the decision not to fly domestic flights anymore.

North

Don't use Thai much, but a couple of years ago i flew them on the Don Muang - Chiangmai run. Shortly after takeoff, while making the banking turn, I noticed that something wasn't right. We didn't feel as if we were at the 'correct speed' as if the plane was slightly struggling to climb.

About 4-5 minutes into the flight, the captain made an anouncement that we were returning to Don Muang because of a "problem with the aircraft" he said no more than that...

Holy s#it !! to say everyone on board was nervous would be a mild understatement. Anyway, we made a wide circle of Bangkok then landed. Once on the ground the 'problem' was explained to us...

After takeoff the pilot could not retract the landing gear !

We got transfered to another aircraft while mechanics and technicians swarmed all over this one. It was quite an experience..

[Mid]

Thailand to hold air safety meeting in wake of Phuket crash

Published : Sun, 23 Sep 2007 10:19

By : Agencies

BANGKOK (Thomson Financial) - Thai government officials and the country's airports operator will meet next week to discuss how to bolster confidence on air safety after the Phuket air crash, a minister said Saturday.

Deputy Transport Minister Sansern Wongcha-um told Agence France-Presse the government would meet Thursday with Airports of Thailand.

'Our aviation safety standards were already at the international level, but we have to see what we can do to boost confidence among travellers in Thailand,' Sansern said.

A total of 89 people, most of them foreigners, were killed when the plane, operated by charter airline One-Two-Go, crashed last Sunday while landing at the tourist resort of Phuket.

The plane slammed onto the runway in driving rain and wind and broke up in flames.

Thai authorities Friday sent the two black box flight data recorders to the United States for analysis.

Officials are investigating whether bad weather, dangerous wind conditions, airport malfunctions or pilot error were to blame.

abcmoney.co.uk

[londonthai]

the aircraft can be flown by somebody with a little experience, just for private use - and with an outdated equipment. Airliners are flown by at least 2 pilots in the cockpit using modern equipment and using well maintained runways.

here is a link to air safety - but doesn't compare to the other modes of transport

http://www.geocities.com/khlim777_my/ashowsafe1.htm

[Acquiesce]

Shame this thread was hijacked by thavisa statisticians, could you not have started a thread of your own?

[think_too_mut]

Shame this thread was hijacked by thavisa statisticians, could you not have started a thread of your own?

I did. 6 days ago.

http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=143009

[stevenjm]

Shame this thread was hijacked by thavisa statisticians, could you not have started a thread of your own?

Don't be so serious - its a game

and the original question was stupid anway, of course they are safe.

[think_too_mut]

Now your saying "So far, looks like trains are safer than airplanes". why aren't you comparing it against an airline with good safety record instead of just picking that one or why aren't you comparing with a different train that has not had good safety.

Why don't you get statistics for train tragedies against statistics for air tragedies if your going to make that argument and not just choose one that has had the luck of nothing yet.

Here - train tragedies on indian pacific (an thats one train mind you) in australia vs Quantas (hundreds of aircraft) in Australia.

Trains lose.

At least, it is on the discussion track. 30 years of Shinkansen and no fatalities is more than "luck". With all the earthquakes that affect anything on the ground.

BTW, it is Qantas, not Quantas.

[consumerismsux]

I think this thread is hilarious!

"Rubbish."

"Absolute rubbish."

"Old woman at hairdressers."

"Hystrerical ranting."

[stevenjm]

Now your saying "So far, looks like trains are safer than airplanes". why aren't you comparing it against an airline with good safety record instead of just picking that one or why aren't you comparing with a different train that has not had good safety.

Why don't you get statistics for train tragedies against statistics for air tragedies if your going to make that argument and not just choose one that has had the luck of nothing yet.

Here - train tragedies on indian pacific (an thats one train mind you) in australia vs Quantas (hundreds of aircraft) in Australia.

Trains lose.

At least, it is on the discussion track. 30 years of Shinkansen and no fatalities is more than "luck". With all the earthquakes that affect anything on the ground.

BTW, it is Qantas, not Quantas.

Personally I would rather be in an aircraft during an earthquake and Shinkansen sure is not going to get me where I am going.

[SamuiJens]

I think this thread is hilarious!

"Rubbish."

"Absolute rubbish."

"Old woman at hairdressers."

"Hystrerical ranting."

Finally a post I can agree with! :D

[cubes2]

Used Thai Airlines Yesterday LHR-BKK

Great flight.

Very frindly staff.

No charge for Booze. its five dollars a go on some USA flights. !!!!

Food was great.

Leg room for seats was good.

TG flight stopped at the gate, no bus.

Great Airline.

[BANGKOK123]

I think your all ######s and talk too much

[SamuiJens]

I think your all ######s and talk too much

You mean type too much! :D

[TBWG]

Hi My 4 penn'oth.........

In the US, each year there are about 40,000 deaths per year in automobile

accidents vs. about 200 in air transport. To put this in perspective, the

chance of dying in an automobile accident is about 1000 times more than

winning a typical state lottery in a year.

If we ignore property and bodily damage and focus on fatalities only, we

should look at fatality rates per passenger mile traveled. This require some

research. You can go to the National Transportation Safety board website

(http://www.itsasafety.org) to do some research or look at a summary table

here (http://hazmat.dot.gov/riskcompare.htm). According to the latter, each

year in the US 1 out of 6800 drivers dies in an auto accident. The rate for

airline passengers is 1 in 1.6 million. The same table shows that per

passenger mile, air travel is safer by more than a factor of two. I doubt

this last figure; I think it should be about 100x safer, because I guess we

drive and fly the same number of miles (give or take a factor or 2-5) per

year, yet fatalities are 200 times higher for autos than for airlines.

Hope this is helpful.

TBWG

PS I nicked narrative from tinternet, so don't ask me any questions about it just buy more lottery tickets to reduce the odds.

[ClaytonSeymour]

Rubbish! Many western businessmen travel on Emirates; if you've nothing constructive to say then don't sprout rubbish. For those tempted to listen to this unfounded, provocative talk, may I point out that Emirates has one of the youngest fleets out there AND they have never had a crash.

Do I have an obligation to be "constructive" when talking about Emirates?

When we are at rubbish, I don't know what kind of it 80% of passengers eat - airconditioning can't cope with foul smell and body odor. Constant exposure to it may present a health hazard to flight attendants - not unlike tobacco smoke to bartenders in pubs.

Why don't One World or Star Alliance fight to get such a pearl of aviation into their membership?

Arguably, Al Jazeera is better TV than CNN....but....?

I detect a hint of racism in your tone. Perhaps an American who doesn't like to see Arabs being successful?

I think you'll find that Emirates don't wish to join an alliance. Why would they want to given their ambitious expansion plans?

Anyway, I suggest that this discussion is conducted elsewhere - it's gone way off the original subject.

[farang2002]

After the 1-2 -Go plane crash in Phuket there has been many speculations and rumours about flight safety or lack of same in Thailand / Asia. Speculations concerning "company culture", but also speculations about the Thai authorities and their ability / willingness to perform their task to ensure, that the airlines follow the rules set up for safe operations of flights.

In the last few years I mostly have been flying with Thai Airways from Europe to Thailand, but all these speculations have made me think of, if I should switch to a western airline like Lufthansa, SAS, Finnair, Austrian Airlines, Swiss, simply for safety reasons?

I would like to hear your opinions, specially opinions from people working with aviation in Thailand / Asia

I am mostly interested in aspects concerning international flights, since I last year made the decision not to fly domestic flights anymore.

North

I have made 26 roundtrips to from Los Angeles to Thailand in the last six years. All but eight trips were on Thai Air and six of those trips were non-stop 16-18 hours...no problems of any kind. The non-stops are on the Airbus A340-500 which is one of Thai Air's newest aircraft In all my trips only one trip was more than 30 minutes behind schedule. How can I complain??

[samtam]

OK - on topic I hope - has anyone flown on TG business class to London recently? How was it? What lounge facilities are there at Heathrow?