Thai Airways Stuck With Airbus Jumbo

[MikeWill]

If Thai Airways was smart they'd reconfigure these things for high volume seating and try to entice tons of budget travellers to come to Thailand. Forget about the Thaksin-era dreams of planeloads of wealthy tourists and get back to what works. Another alternative is to sell or lease the A380s to another airline.

Long time didn't see you on board. Glad, you're back!

[robokop]

THAI stuck with Airbus jumbo

BANGKOK: -- Thai Airways International (THAI) has no other options but to keep its order for six Airbus 380 megajets it wanted to cancel as doing so would lead to huge adverse consequences.

"The best option available for us is to delay taking delivery of those A380s,'' Wallop Bhukkanasut, the chairman of THAI's executive board, said last night.

The flag carrier had earlier sought to terminate the A380 contract or change to another future Airbus model, the A350-1000, as it had come to believe the world's largest commercial aircraft would not be economical to operate.

In the recent negotiations with the European planemaker, Airbus has ruled out those changes and THAI itself has come to realise that the cancellation will result in a legal battle that would have a significant impact on THAI and the image of the country as a whole, something the airline wants to avoid, according to Mr Wallop.

The cancellation would expose the airline to US$700 million in penalty costs _ $300 million in pre-payment for airframes and $400 million for contracts already committed.

"Several contracts involved in the A380s are restricted with absolutely no room for change,'' Mr Wallop told reporters after the airline's board meeting.

THAI is now proposing that the delivery of its first three A380s, each costing $300 million, be put off to 2012 and the remaining three in 2013.

The airline has been contracted to take delivery of the jets in two lots, in October 2010 and June 2011.

"In 2012, global economic conditions should be in much better shape, and so will traffic volume. By then, THAI's cash flow problem should have been resolved and the economic environment improved,'' he said.

THAI will continue to negotiate with Airbus on details of the new proposal but it wants the company to cap the cost escalation in order to minimise the financial impact, he added.

-- Bangkok Post 2009-07-10

No tears here for Thai Air. Last year I made early reservations R/t BKK to JFK-USA non stop. They discontinued non stop, changed non stop BKK to LAX-USA. I then had to get r/t LAX in Calif to JFK in NY.

Then Thai Air ended non stop BKK to LAX, gave me BKK to Japan then Japan to LAX. With change of times I had to change times on r/t LAX to JFK, and of course at expense to me. Thai Air then upgraded me for R/T flight, or so I thought since they told me. Then Thai Air Changed again and went back to non stop BKK to LAX. So again I had to change times for my R/T LAX to JFK. All this in a 9 month period of time. Flight time, I flew Business Class to USA. On return trip when I got to LAX for Thai flight to BKK

I found out they had only upgraded me for the trip BKK to LAX and not return trip. I then had to pay $2200 to go coach to Business Class. When I later complained Thai Air said to bad, my mistake on me thinking they upgraded the whole r/t from Superior Coach to Business.

So I shed no tears for Thai Air nor do I fly Thai Air any more. EVER

[deeveloper]

The future is sub-orbital:- why fly days through atmosphere (burning copious amounts of fuel) when you could fly up, and use the earth's rotational momentum to do majority of the work - travel around the world in a fraction of the time!

What excuse does any corporation or government have for spending, or gambling, ridiculous sums of money (amounts they could never hope to pay back on their own), on luxuries while having someone else's freedom of lifestyle as collateral.

Meanwhile people are starving and struggling for dignity... that not cross minds when they spend foolishly?

Government bailouts should not be legal - companies who make bad executive decisions should be held sole accountable... then less companies/governments would make the unwise decisions then - accountability 101.

[bonobo]

The "unwashed" (very inaccurate) backpackers who develop a relationship with Thailand at 19 are the ones who will return on their honeymoon in their twenties, family holidays in their thirties and forties, conventions in their fifties and retirement in their sixties, each time increasing their spending. It's too bad that the politicians can't think beyond the short term.

THis is 100% correct, and it is very shortsighted to ignore this demographic.  THese kids will mature into a more financially viable demographic as they get older, and Thailand needs to impress upon them now what a great destination this counry really is.  Get them here now, and reap the benifits later when they come back with their families.

[jackdanielsesq]

240Z - miss ya, babe!!!

BR>Jack

The future is sub-orbital:- why fly days through atmosphere (burning copious amounts of fuel) when you could fly up, and use the earth's rotational momentum to do majority of the work - travel around the world in a fraction of the time! What excuse does any corporation or government have for spending, or gambling, ridiculous sums of money (amounts they could never hope to pay back on their own), on luxuries while having someone else's freedom of lifestyle as collateral. Meanwhile people are starving and struggling for dignity... that not cross minds when they spend foolishly? Government bailouts should not be legal - companies who make bad executive decisions should be held sole accountable... then less companies/governments would make the unwise decisions then - accountability 101.

[bonobo]

Thai had originally ordered these planes for delivery starting in 2008. They then got compensation from airbus because they got delayed, on the basis that Thai would have to fly their crappy-interior (no seat-back TVs) 747s for longer...

Now they want to delay the delivery, I assume so that they can give even more European/Australian tourists a bad impression every time they enter one of their decrepit 747 interiors.

Bring on the A380s. It's the only thing likely to get me back on Thai for the flights to London again. (Qantas refurbished all their interiors, and have direct flights. and the only issue with Emirates is that it isn't direct... After all theirs is the in-flight entertainment system that wins all the awards.)

I've always preferred the Boeing 747 to the airbus. Much more comfortable, and business class is really luxurious. Sure you cannot compare the A380 to the 747, but when Boeing unveils the dream liner, then you can make the comparison.

Barry

I have a question for the aviation experts here.  Isn't the comfort and experience of flying related to how the airline cofnigures and outfits the plane?  I mean, would a 777, 747, or 380 all be the same if the same seats, entertainment systems, and catering being used?  I flew a Thai 747 once to LA in first class, and it pretty much sucked.  BUt the same trip on a Singapore 747 in first class was 200% better.  And I fly United quite a bit and love their new business lcass, but ANA's economy class seats are much more comfortable than United's even in the same airframe.

[cdnvic]

Long time didn't see you on board. Glad, you're back!

Thanks Bk

Isn't the comfort and experience of flying related to how the airline cofnigures and outfits the plane?  I mean, would a 777, 747, or 380 all be the same if the same seats, entertainment systems, and catering being used?  I flew a Thai 747 once to LA in first class, and it pretty much sucked.  BUt the same trip on a Singapore 747 in first class was 200% better.  And I fly United quite a bit and love their new business lcass, but ANA's economy class seats are much more comfortable than United's even in the same airframe.

Depends on the customer. Launch customers get quite a lot of input into the design of an aircraft interior, same goes for the ones equipping large fleets. The airline's reputation has something to do with it as well. Singapore Airlines intentionally installs less seating in its longer range A345s, A380s, and 777s because it can afford to charge a bit of a premium as it's never been perceived as a cheap airline, and it's customers expect comfort.

[brahmburgers]

The contrarotating turboprop might be the future.

Back to basics. The new turboprops engines can fly 20% cheaper and with nearly the same speed as jets,

It is murmured that a lot of builders are thinking about the change to turboprops.

Maybe the end of jet powered airplanes?

If Thai Airways execs are anything like EGAT (Electricity) execs, they won't even consider the idea of props. Just the mention of props would get them thinking 'old fashioned.' Same reasons why EGAT insists on getting several nuclear power plants: because they think it's the most modern way, and best way to impress the neighbors and world at large. It's the same mentality that gets Thai VIPs dreaming of having the biggest show-off house on a busy highway - the most impressive way to go for lodging (along with gray colored late model luxury car with tinted windows and good-luck numbers on the license plate).

The only way Thai Air execs might consider something like turboprop is if the trend-setters (farang companies) all start getting them.

Similarly, the only way EGAT would seriously consider solar arrays for power generation would be if farang trend-setters do it first.

[Datsun240Z]

The future is sub-orbital:- why fly days through atmosphere (burning copious amounts of fuel) when you could fly up, and use the earth's rotational momentum to do majority of the work - travel around the world in a fraction of the time!

What excuse does any corporation or government have for spending, or gambling, ridiculous sums of money (amounts they could never hope to pay back on their own), on luxuries while having someone else's freedom of lifestyle as collateral.

Meanwhile people are starving and struggling for dignity... that not cross minds when they spend foolishly?

Government bailouts should not be legal - companies who make bad executive decisions should be held sole accountable... then less companies/governments would make the unwise decisions then - accountability 101.

That is true. But money making always comes before efficiency. I beleive NASA is experimenting allready long times with scramjets. Go up in space an go down again. About concorde and A380 comparisation: 2 engines of A380 produce the same thrust as all 4 concorde's engines with afterburner on. Ow yeah right, the concorde was poluting

[Datsun240Z]

The contrarotating turboprop might be the future.

Back to basics.

The new turboprops engines can fly 20% cheaper and with nearly the same speed as jets,

It is murmured that a lot of builders are thinking about the change to turboprops.

Maybe the end of jet powered airplanes?

No way turboprops fly with the same speed of jets

[jackdanielsesq]

Valid point - in BC Emirates, I got cramp in both elbow regions, asleep, reclining. Spoke with #2 PIC who said they had many complaints since the series 2 seats had been fitted - a supposed upgrade. Airbus refused to bring back the original. Elbow cramps? - Lordy can they not even build decent armrests.

One has to feel real bad for the DVT crowd!!

I am amazed at how Thai has deteriorated - I also dropped them about 2 years back. They used to be comparable with SG, all day long.

It does not cost that much to refurb an older bus, even clean is good.

I flew a Virgin 747 recently - stunning interior!! But then ol' Sir Richard is a kick-in-the-head.

Probably got Boeing to spring for it. Their roach looked as good as most bizz class.

BR>Jack

I have a question for the aviation experts here. Isn't the comfort and experience of flying related to how the airline cofnigures and outfits the plane? I mean, would a 777, 747, or 380 all be the same if the same seats, entertainment systems, and catering being used? I flew a Thai 747 once to LA in first class, and it pretty much sucked. BUt the same trip on a Singapore 747 in first class was 200% better. And I fly United quite a bit and love their new business lcass, but ANA's economy class seats are much more comfortable than United's even in the same airframe.

[GeorgeW]

Not an expert on CASM or 'Cost Per Available Seat Mile' (cost it takes to fly one seat one mile) but on THAI's A380 configurations, apparently the entire upper deck is first or business class. This may be over-reaching just a tad? Just for starters, who in business class wishes to sit behind the wings?

Perhaps it may have been better to have ordered a configuration consisting of optimal first/business configuration on the top deck seated BEFORE the wings (ala SQ) then 'economy plus' on top-deck behind the wings and economy on lower deck (also perhaps 'economy plus' at the front of the lower deck?)

Regardless, it's probably too late to change the configuration Thaksin era THAI ordered which requires an 88.8% passenger capacity just to break even...

Pictorial of A380's interiors, configurations etc:

http://www.aviationexplorer.com/a380_facts.htm

Perhaps THAI could make THIS profitable??

Singapore Air does not put first/business class on the upper deck before the wings. About 2/3 of the entire upper deck is business class. The very front of the lower deck is first class. If you look at that picture you posted, it means the majority of business class is over the wing. There is no space to put both first and business on the upper deck before the wings. I think SQ only has about 5 rows of business class seats on the upper deck before the wings. If you divided that space between business and first class you'd only get maybe a dozen seats in there at most.

If SQ put their first class on the upper deck, rather than the lower deck, the combination of the two cabins would just about fill up the entire upper deck. So Thai's decision to use the entire upper deck for first/business isn't a bad decision in my opinion. If I was flying first I'd rather be on a Thai plane on the upper deck than a SQ plane on the lower deck, provided everything else was the same. I agree that many people may not want to be behind the wings, but maybe they could reserve those seats for people flying on award tickets and keep the forward seats for the cash paying customers.

Actually I've flown on SQ's 380 before, in economy, and prefer the upper deck which is behind the wings. Nothing wrong with that position in my opinion and I would actually prefer that to being over the wing. The plane is super quiet and a magnificent piece of engineering. I hope it works out for Thai and they can put them to good use as I'd enjoy flying on them.

Regarding the 88.8% capacity figure quoted, I wonder how accurate that is. Wouldn't it depend a lot on what the ticket prices are, and what the fuel prices are? Someone probably calculated that at some point in time given Thai's pricing at that time and the fuel prices at that time. When they actually take delivery though it's anyone's guess as to what the break-even capacity figure will really be.

[GeorgeW]

Valid point - in BC Emirates, I got cramp in both elbow regions, asleep, reclining. Spoke with #2 PIC who said they had many complaints since the series 2 seats had been fitted - a supposed upgrade. Airbus refused to bring back the original. Elbow cramps? - Lordy can they not even build decent armrests.

One has to feel real bad for the DVT crowd!!

I am amazed at how Thai has deteriorated - I also dropped them about 2 years back. They used to be comparable with SG, all day long.

It does not cost that much to refurb an older bus, even clean is good.

I flew a Virgin 747 recently - stunning interior!! But then ol' Sir Richard is a kick-in-the-head.

Probably got Boeing to spring for it. Their roach looked as good as most bizz class.

BR>Jack

I have a question for the aviation experts here. Isn't the comfort and experience of flying related to how the airline cofnigures and outfits the plane? I mean, would a 777, 747, or 380 all be the same if the same seats, entertainment systems, and catering being used? I flew a Thai 747 once to LA in first class, and it pretty much sucked. BUt the same trip on a Singapore 747 in first class was 200% better. And I fly United quite a bit and love their new business lcass, but ANA's economy class seats are much more comfortable than United's even in the same airframe.

A lot of it does depend on the configuration, seats, service, etc. However the A380 is by far the quietest plane I've ever been on. If all things were equal, I'd pick an A380 anyday over anything else currently flying. The quiet cabin for me makes a big difference in comfort. Once the Boeing 787 comes out, I'm sure it will be a big improvement over Boeing's other offerings and it could easily be equal or even surpass the A380 in comfort/quietness.

I'm not any sort of expert in aerodynamics and how it affects plane stability, but in my experience the bigger planes are more stable and less susceptible to turbulence than are smaller planes. So bigger planes are more comfortable to me than smaller planes. For mid-sized jets, such as the Boeing 777 or Airbus 330, I prefer the 777. I like the way the overhead bins are positioned and the 777 seems to be more resistant to turbulence compared to an equivalent sized 330. The engines though on the 777 are quite loud, so that's a drawback, especially on takeoff.

Edited July 12, 2009 by GeorgeW

[Thai at Heart]

Tentatively, each of THAI's A380s would be designed to carry 500 passengers, compared to 471 on SIA's first A380, which made its maiden flight from Singapore to Sydney last Thursday.

An A380 could accommodate up to 853 passengers in an all-economy configuration. The upper deck of THAI's A380 caters to premium passengers, with 14 first-class seats in the front section and up to 68 business-class seats behind. The 418 economy-class seats would occupy the entire lower deck.

"Our A380 concept is zeroing in on our hallmark -- passenger comfort and services with the touch of Thai-ness, without being too lavish," Mr Pandit said.

http://www.tg-elearning.com/mambo/index.ph...9&Itemid=59

Got to love his frank description of his idea of service!

[GeorgeW]

Tentatively, each of THAI's A380s would be designed to carry 500 passengers, compared to 471 on SIA's first A380, which made its maiden flight from Singapore to Sydney last Thursday.

An A380 could accommodate up to 853 passengers in an all-economy configuration. The upper deck of THAI's A380 caters to premium passengers, with 14 first-class seats in the front section and up to 68 business-class seats behind. The 418 economy-class seats would occupy the entire lower deck.

"Our A380 concept is zeroing in on our hallmark -- passenger comfort and services with the touch of Thai-ness, without being too lavish," Mr Pandit said.

http://www.tg-elearning.com/mambo/index.ph...9&Itemid=59

Got to love his frank description of his idea of service!

I think the 'too lavish' he was referring to was the suites that Singapore Air and Emirates chose. Thai is just planning to have standard first class seating. Also Singapore Air has very wide business class seats on the A380, perhaps the widest business class seats of any airline. Some people even complain that they're too wide and dislike not being able to have better positioned arm rests closer in. My guess is that Thai will also use more standard width business class seats.

[cosmont]

I don't fly anymore to Paris by Thai. I feel upset of the old 747 without individual TV. So I fly by Air France on Airbus A340 for cheaper price !

Actually, I was waiting the delivery of the A380 aircrafts as they planed to use one for the Paris flight in 2010...

Well, if they delay, they will not see me again soon on that destination.

Someday, they should understand that old aircrafts are far to be smooth as silk.

[robokop]

THAI stuck with Airbus jumbo

BANGKOK: -- Thai Airways International (THAI) has no other options but to keep its order for six Airbus 380 megajets it wanted to cancel as doing so would lead to huge adverse consequences.

"The best option available for us is to delay taking delivery of those A380s,'' Wallop Bhukkanasut, the chairman of THAI's executive board, said last night.

The flag carrier had earlier sought to terminate the A380 contract or change to another future Airbus model, the A350-1000, as it had come to believe the world's largest commercial aircraft would not be economical to operate.

In the recent negotiations with the European planemaker, Airbus has ruled out those changes and THAI itself has come to realise that the cancellation will result in a legal battle that would have a significant impact on THAI and the image of the country as a whole, something the airline wants to avoid, according to Mr Wallop.

The cancellation would expose the airline to US$700 million in penalty costs _ $300 million in pre-payment for airframes and $400 million for contracts already committed.

"Several contracts involved in the A380s are restricted with absolutely no room for change,'' Mr Wallop told reporters after the airline's board meeting.

THAI is now proposing that the delivery of its first three A380s, each costing $300 million, be put off to 2012 and the remaining three in 2013.

The airline has been contracted to take delivery of the jets in two lots, in October 2010 and June 2011.

"In 2012, global economic conditions should be in much better shape, and so will traffic volume. By then, THAI's cash flow problem should have been resolved and the economic environment improved,'' he said.

THAI will continue to negotiate with Airbus on details of the new proposal but it wants the company to cap the cost escalation in order to minimise the financial impact, he added.

-- Bangkok Post 2009-07-10

[britmaveric]

Perhaps a380 can be employed on JFK to BKK route. Be nice to bring it back!!

[Datsun240Z]

Yes it's very nice that the comfort is going up, but comon i'm looking at page 1 the interior picture, what do people want? Are we building complete living rooms into airplanes? I mean wasn't it about the flight experience itself? I rather sit 3 hours in a plane going supersonic with a nice seat and good meal and some coffee/whine, than 12 hours in a complete living room.

[Datsun240Z]

we just dont have the "lets go and do it atitude" is us anymore.

things like concorde and the saturn 5 rocket were built from the hart, now things are built from the brain like the a380, yeah its a great aircraft but the passion is no were near as high as concorde.

companys couldnt even be assed to keep her flying anymore.

its a fuc_king disgrace, what does that show to future generations

[Spee]

Perhaps a380 can be employed on JFK to BKK route. Be nice to bring it back!!

I'm just one homie, but if they did, they would have my business in a heartbeat. I'm back working in the states and am looking for the most direct way to Bkk. That is definitely a non-stop through JFK. Even IAD (WashingtonDC) or ORD (Chicago) would be good. I'm just not sure they could fill that route all by themselves. There would have to be some sort of massive marketing and PR campaign by the entire country.

[Spee]

we just dont have the "lets go and do it atitude" is us anymore.

This simply isn't true. Today's technology is truly impressive and growing at a phenomenal rate. From a technology standpoint, sub-orbital flights are certainly obtainable, but by no means trivial and without substantial risk. With respect to air travel, the question is whether or not it can be done economically on a large scale, or even on a small scale enough for the very rich to afford it. Why would the very rich want to do something like this, when they can buy, lease or rent a private jet at a fraction of the cost with maximum luxury accommodations and privacy at a fraction of the technological risk? For example, look at Warren Buffet's NetJets company.

[cmert]

TG uses aircrafts with award plates showing that the aiplane got the award 1987 for being the first plane with more than 400 tons take off weight - other airlines burried these planes since long in Nevada

TG aircrafts are often rather dirty, the service is so so, inflight entertainment on board of most airplanes lacks

TG staff all over must be a much smaller cost factor than other Star Alliance carriers as the average salary is much lower than what e.g. Lufthansa pays

TG flights I took recently were often delayed, not very convenient and compared with others not cheap though nearly fully booked

TG's frequent flyer program has become worse every year, trusting that one can use the miles to get a free flight will leave some customers a little bit frustrated as the inflation rate for TG miles is much higher than the average rate of the Star Alliance partner countries...

In total - TG should be much more profitable than most other airlines with the same destinations. So, what's wrong? The discussion just a red herring?

As TG frequent flyer since 15 years I have started to change to other airlines, better prices with more flexible offers at the same destinations. New airplanes with more comfort would let me consider to fly TG again but the pricing should be competitive - not only to other Star Alliance carriers but to the local ticket market. The cost calculation for the A380 was clear when the order was placed, I guess that the truth of the published figures is depending on many other facts.

[kiwiphil]

AS a retired aircrew member,having done a few flights from BKK- to " Down under land" i think

that I M H O, the DC10 that TG operated , was a lot more comfortable to do long haul,more economical

to operate,better freight carrying capacity and IF Maintained properly,,,More Profitable to Operate in

all regions. Only the L1011 was a better designed/constructed A/C . These new " composit" A/C will

continue to experience ongoing problems if fear ( i m h o )...

LARGE PURCHASE DEBT = LARGE DEBT PERIOD,, NOT LARGE IMAGE where the Banks are concerned !!!!

t.t.f.n. .

Edited July 13, 2009 by kiwiphil

[baht&sold]

BRING ON the A380's no matter, provide the most viable/sensible seating configurations, go after direct routes to London, Europe, Scandinavia etc, offering best value fares on economy seats (commensurate with factoring milk-run stop-over/connecting flights cost/time and add a reasonable non-stop premium). First/business will always pay more, especially for direct to Bkk flights. Even economy will pay a 'reasonable' premium for direct.

Phase-out the 18 ageing 747-400s and also sell or lease out (if possible) the 4 high seat-per-mile-cost, fuel-eating, long-hual A340-500's (3 sitting on tarmac, only 1 in use now on LA-Bkk) and replace them with 2 of the A380's (on NY-Bkk/LA-Bkk). Again, offer best value economy fares with a reasonable non-stop premium. Even as a loss-leader initially, at least it would raise THAI's image and brings tourists into the country to spend money which helps the economy and exponentially adds to tax coffers (not to mention loads of FREE world-wide publicity as the new A380 routes are announced).

Of course, to truly turn THAI's fortunes around in the 'long-haul' would also require truly professional boards and executives (and a union wake-up) and most importantly, no political meddling/appointing cronies/receiving perks/siphoning contracts etc (ok, ok, that's a bit pie in the sky but have to begin somewhere...)

Personally would absolutely love to see THAI flying high once again.

[verydumbubba]

Visit the Tucson, Arizona aircraft graveyard. Doubt there is a market for any aircraft, even for free.

The travel numbers are simply not there any more, that economic model is dead.

Bubba

[finchy]

c

Edited July 13, 2009 by finchy

[finchy]

Airbus made the SO wrong mistake by retiring the concorde and instead built the a380. I hope the a380 lands on a scrapyard! I want to go back to the future. Concorde flew for 27 years without one single accident! , The one in Paris wasn't caused by the concorde itself but by debrie on the runway throwen up by the tires and hitting the fuel tanks.

Aircraft manufacturers do not retire planes, airlines do, and what did airbus have to do with Concorde anyway??

Edir: oops just noticed cdnvic already said this.

Wrong Airbus is the biggest reason that we don't see concorde still in the air !!!

Airbus made half of the parts for Concorde along with British Aerospace. Once Airbus decided they no longer wanted to produce parts B.A had no other option (once it had used up it's supply of existing spares) but to ground her forever.

[finchy]

Airbus made the SO wrong mistake by retiring the concorde and instead built the a380.

Concorde is not an Airbus product. Airbus had nothing to do with it's retirement.

Do you ever look anything up before making statements?

Concorde never made a profit in its history. Was propped by both B.A and air Fance

Concorde was fantastically profitable for B.A that's whey they spend millions re - engineering there concorde's after the Air France crash.

[Spee]

Visit the Tucson, Arizona aircraft graveyard.

Call me crazy but the majority of aircraft in that picture appear to be B-52's, C-5's, KC-135's and the like. It does not appear to be a storage area for commercial aircraft.

Edited July 13, 2009 by Spee