Is It Safe To Fly Thai Airways International ?

[chavy]

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

A freind of mine was travelling with Thai coming back from London last year. Whilst waiting at the head of the runway everything went dead, complete electrical failure. 4 hrs later they were on the way but no explanation as to why the fault happened

[Cobalt60]

Earlier this month on landing at BKK the trim that covers the overhead projector fell down. It was on cable type hinges and swung into the seats below it, it was just pure luck the flight was not full and the two seats were empty.

Hardly a major incident I know, but it makes you wonder.

Its a bit like gambling I feel, do everything you can to get the odds in your favour.

Having worked on military aircraft is a mixed blessing.

I think Thai is a good bet generally.

[thaihome]

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?

Not to London, but Munich and Frankfort in the last 2 months or so. In seat screens with good movie selection, lay flat seats, good food. All in all, about the best that be expected in a long haul flight.

TH

[ashacat]

QUOTE(Aussietraveller @ 2007-09-22 20:46:58)

I regularly fly Long Haul on Qantas, BA, Thai, Singapore Airlines and Emirates.

I would not hesitate to fly on any of them.

Short Haul in Asia I use Air Asia, Jet Star Asia, TG, Sin.

I have in the past flown 12GO, however i would be hesitant to do so again.

Just my personal opinion.

It's not work, I would guess. Hobby?

No western company would send you on Emirates, Air Asia, jet Star or 1-2-go.

What's wrong with Emirates?!!

I work for a "Western Company" and I have been sent on Air Asia for a local flight on a couple of occasions...

[chiang mai]

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?

Not to London, but Munich and Frankfort in the last 2 months or so. In seat screens with good movie selection, lay flat seats, good food. All in all, about the best that be expected in a long haul flight.

TH

TG lounge facilities at T3 are pretty dire the last time I used them (2 years ago). A single room, not large with non too comfortable seating and the usual sandwiches/drinks but bright lights and no atmosphere or anything else to recommend it.

[think_too_mut]

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?

There is no Arab (other than some figureheads who have no clue what airline biz is about) behind the Emirates. All the things are done by westerners.

Then it comes down to the service the passengers see. Great service, new planes.

That does not make the passengers smell like roses. And when I see them on their knees praying next to check-in counters, is it what I really want to see while on holidays? And then smell their odor all along the flight?

[mark100]

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

Thai airways is an international carrier and hopefully has high safety standards, budget airlines have smaller profit margins to work with and sometimes cut costs in the wrong areas.

[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?

There is no Arab (other than some figureheads who have no clue what airline biz is about) behind the Emirates. All the things are done by westerners.

Then it comes down to the service the passengers see. Great service, new planes.

That does not make the passengers smell like roses. And when I see them on their knees praying next to check-in counters, is it what I really want to see while on holidays? And then smell their odor all along the flight?

Some people would consider it all part of the "holiday experience". I've never experienced the "odour problem" with Emirates, though I don't dispute that if you ended up on a flight of immigrant workers from certain countries then maybe? I'm told that if you really want to sample unpleasant odors PIA is the undisputed champion!

[cdnvic]

Thai airways is an international carrier and hopefully has high safety standards, budget airlines have smaller profit margins to work with and sometimes cut costs in the wrong areas.

Again, you're mixing up Budget airlines and Bad airlines. There are mainline, and even flag carriers who have questionable maintenance practises. Some of the worst safety records can come from them such as China Airlines or Garuda. Then you look at budget carriers with perfect or near perfect safety records.

The notion that budget carriers save money by skimping on maintenance is a myth.

[wileycoyote]

Yes.

I have and will do again.

Wiley Coyote

[ClaytonSeymour]

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

You can view comprehensive details (including ATC transcripts) of accidents involving Thai Airways here:

http://aviation-safety.net/database/operat...ne.php?var=5154

I've flown with them many times & will continue to do so.

May I ask why you've taken the decision not to travel on domestic flights?

<script type=text/javascript> <script src="http://pagead2.googlesyndication.com/pagead/show_ads.js" type=text/javascript>

Edited September 24, 2007 by ClaytonSeymour

[flyer]

Depending on your origin and destination and considering only airlines susceptible to fly between europe and south-east Asia here are the leading airlines with best safety records (and which have been operating enough years to generate a credible record):

With NIL hull losses since start up:

Emirates;

EVA airways

Virgin Atlantic

Air Nippon

Kuwait airways.

Class one airlines (less then 1 hull loss per 10 years)

China Eastern

Jet airways (India)

LTU (German airline)

Qatar airways.

For Emirates i would be a little reluctant due to their very fast expansion now and tha is known to be a factor that might influence safety.

Thai Airways has recently emerged from class 4 to class 3 (class 3 = More then one hull loss per 5 years and less then one per year).

It is up to you how you feel , but for myself i try to book only with class one airlines, or class two if there is no class one flying the route. By all means avoid flying with class 4 which means more then one loss per year ...

Also, and this is a personal point of view i try to avoid airlines that use large numbers of ex-military pilots. Not that military pilots don't know how to fly, but it is more a question of mind setting and culture. Like you would put a rally pilot driving a taxi in BKK to give a clue; ah although some local taxi drivers in BKK are doing quite good on that side.

[wileycoyote]

Depending on your origin and destination and considering only airlines susceptible to fly between europe and south-east Asia here are the leading airlines with best safety records (and which have been operating enough years to generate a credible record):

With NIL hull losses since start up:

Emirates;

EVA airways

Virgin Atlantic

Air Nippon

Kuwait airways.

Class one airlines (less then 1 hull loss per 10 years)

China Eastern

Jet airways (India)

LTU (German airline)

Qatar airways.

Good Posting

Wiley Coyote

[North]

Depending on your origin and destination and considering only airlines susceptible to fly between europe and south-east Asia here are the leading airlines with best safety records (and which have been operating enough years to generate a credible record):

With NIL hull losses since start up:

Emirates;

EVA airways

Virgin Atlantic

Air Nippon

Kuwait airways.

Class one airlines (less then 1 hull loss per 10 years)

China Eastern

Jet airways (India)

LTU (German airline)

Qatar airways.

Where did you get these statistics from ?

And I wonder, why you are counting loss of hulls rather than loss of lives ?

North

[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?

Not to London, but Munich and Frankfort in the last 2 months or so. In seat screens with good movie selection, lay flat seats, good food. All in all, about the best that be expected in a long haul flight.

TH

TG lounge facilities at T3 are pretty dire the last time I used them (2 years ago). A single room, not large with non too comfortable seating and the usual sandwiches/drinks but bright lights and no atmosphere or anything else to recommend it.

Thanks. I'm not filled with undiluted joy about the prospect of travelling on TG Business Class to London. Apart from what you mention, I gather the seats are the old ones, (viz not lie-flat). Also there is a heckava lot of inconvenience if you have to travel on, or connect with a BA domestic, as I am doing, as there is no through check luggage, (from BA), so you have to offload in London, get on the terminal bus with your suitcase and check in again.

[jackspratt]

Thanks. I'm not filled with undiluted joy about the prospect of travelling on TG Business Class to London. .............. Also there is a heckava lot of inconvenience if you have to travel on, or connect with a BA domestic, as I am doing, as there is no through check luggage, (from BA), so you have to offload in London, get on the terminal bus with your suitcase and check in again.

I would be interested to know where in the world you can move from an international flight on 1 airline to a domestic flight on a different airline, and have your baggage checked through.

As I am sure would the majority of the world's drug smugglers.

[flyer]

Loss of hull means there was an accident serious enough to destroy the aircraft. The fact that this may not cause any loss of life is pure chance, not a consequence of high safety or company standards. For example, the fact that all pax where rescued in the recent fire of a China airlines in Japan was a question of pure luck.

[flyer]

@jacksprat

You may be able to send luggage trough when you fly with two airlines of the same aliance. For example in London you might be able to check trough if you connect on a BMI flight to a local destination. However there might be some restrictions on checking trough for safety or technical reasons where the destination airport is not an international one or when you arrive at the domestic terminal terminal of your final destination. IN such a case you have to clear customs and luggage at the first international airport where you land. In your case this is London. If you want to avoid the big mess of transiting between terminals at London, then you can better choose connecting flights that will connect at a more convenient airports, for example amsterdam.

[North]

Loss of hull means there was an accident serious enough to destroy the aircraft. The fact that this may not cause any loss of life is pure chance, not a consequence of high safety or company standards. For example, the fact that all pax where rescued in the recent fire of a China airlines in Japan was a question of pure luck.

Yes, I do understand what "loss of hulls" mean, I just do not understand why you think it is so important if a hull is lost compared to loss of lives. For me lives are more important than an airplane.

[londonthai]

simply author of those statistics manipulated them to show his favourite airline/s in a better light

[cdnvic]

Loss of hull means there was an accident serious enough to destroy the aircraft. The fact that this may not cause any loss of life is pure chance, not a consequence of high safety or company standards. For example, the fact that all pax where rescued in the recent fire of a China airlines in Japan was a question of pure luck.

Actually, you do the flight crew a great disservice with that statement. There have been many accidents, most recently the China Airlines 737 and the Air France A340 last year that could have resulted in terrible losses of life had it not been for the professionalism and the bravery of the flight crews in getting their passengers off safely and quickly.

[samtam]

Yes, confirmed: TG Business Class to London is old seats, not lie-flat. They appear to have only upgraded their seating on North American routes.

[samtam]

@jacksprat

You may be able to send luggage trough when you fly with two airlines of the same aliance. For example in London you might be able to check trough if you connect on a BMI flight to a local destination. However there might be some restrictions on checking trough for safety or technical reasons where the destination airport is not an international one or when you arrive at the domestic terminal terminal of your final destination. IN such a case you have to clear customs and luggage at the first international airport where you land. In your case this is London. If you want to avoid the big mess of transiting between terminals at London, then you can better choose connecting flights that will connect at a more convenient airports, for example amsterdam.

BMI do not allow through check in, even with TG their Star Alliance partner. So, yes, I've cancelled my TG booking, and am now flying KLM through Schipol to Edinburgh, making the London trip on BA a separate entity in the middle of my trip, (with no connections). bUt the airlines really need to think about through check in for online bookings as presumably that accounts for a large portion of their business today.

[samtam]

I would be interested to know where in the world you can move from an international flight on 1 airline to a domestic flight on a different airline, and have your baggage checked through.

As I am sure would the majority of the world's drug smugglers.

If you fly from Bangkok to Edinburgh via London on 1 ticket (code), you can do it. Not everyone who wants to do this is a drug smuggler. It's just a question of convenience.

Edited October 6, 2007 by samtam

[flyer]

@ SATAM

Legislation, especially in Europe, has made international flying a big mess, especially most 'decisions' were made without any concern for operational issues. Think for example about the division of airports into 'Shengen' and 'non shengen' zones in europe. Such things have made connecting flights only more tricky..and time consuming. So it is not all and only about airlines 'good will. However, with respect to cost reductions, some airlines have become reluctant to check luggage trough, even where that is legally possible. Quality of airlines has not improved in the last decade unfortunately, but this has also enabled 'good' airlines to come out of the crowd, giving consitenly more and better then average.

[flyer]

simply author of those statistics manipulated them to show his favourite airline/s in a better light

When you don't know what you talk about then read only and don't write ! While the classification in 'classes' has been introduced by our company (identification withheld in this forum - out of topic) ten years ago, it is presently widely accepted in the industry. About airline accident statistics, a short try in Google would have given you all the results you need to confirm my assessment about airline safety. To help you develop some more IQ here is link

http://www.jacdec.de/

This one is (partially) free. However most good statistics databases are commercial, i.e. you have to subscribe (and pay) to use them.

[cdnvic]

Hull losses, or losses of life... it depends what your area of concern is. If one decides to use one or the other as their preferred barometer it's just a difference in perspective, it doesn't make the other person stupid.

[jackspratt]

I would be interested to know where in the world you can move from an international flight on 1 airline to a domestic flight on a different airline, and have your baggage checked through.

As I am sure would the majority of the world's drug smugglers.

If you fly from Bangkok to Edinburgh via London on 1 ticket (code), you can do it. Not everyone who wants to do this is a drug smuggler. It's just a question of convenience.

But is still begs the question - where do you, and more particularly, your baggage, pass through customs?

Edited October 7, 2007 by jackspratt

[samtam]

I would be interested to know where in the world you can move from an international flight on 1 airline to a domestic flight on a different airline, and have your baggage checked through.

As I am sure would the majority of the world's drug smugglers.

If you fly from Bangkok to Edinburgh via London on 1 ticket (code), you can do it. Not everyone who wants to do this is a drug smuggler. It's just a question of convenience.

But is still begs the question - where do you, and more particularly, your baggage, pass through customs?

If flying from Bangkok, via London, onto Edinburgh, you check customs and immigration in Edinburgh. Done it many times, but as you acknowledge, these things are becoming more difficult, and the operational process has not been thought through by airlines. I believe BA will allow check through if the other airline is "One World", but TG isn't a member of that. Unfortunately, as I said BMI doesn't afford that courtesy to its fellow Star Alliance member TG.

Edited October 7, 2007 by samtam

[HappyDave35]

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

YES! I have flown Brisbane - London return 5 times in last 6 yrs and Brisbane - Bangkok return 6 times. I would'nt fly with anyone else.

Having said that, QANTAS has got the worlds best safety record.