Why Is Thai Airways Such A Bad Airline?

[NanLaew]

I use proper 'legend' airlines like Emirates, Singapore, Etihad and Cathay.

I feel sorry for those of you that think Thai is in anyway a good airline. Try a proper airline and the difference is astounding.

Some friends tell me that they fly Thai because the Thailand holiday experience starts when you get on the plane!

There speaks a voice of inexperience The Etihad and Emirates (except A380) experience in economy is terrible, and on Emirates the business experience is so hit and miss I don't bother with them any more. I really don't understand the bashing of Thai, look at Skytrax and read the reviews on there see what others think. yes some of Thais fleet is getting a little old and no they don't match SQ or CX but there are far worse out there. I really hope you are not an American because don't get me started on American airlines.

For some reason this has always put me off flying Etihad.

Except that no Etihad staff were on board when that happened:

"French authorities have launched an investigation into a crash involving an Airbus plane due to be delivered to the United Arab Emirates carrier.

Etihad Airways said none of its staff were involved when the A340-600 crashed into a barrier at Toulouse airport, injuring five people on board.

A spokesman for the airline said those hurt belonged to a firm contracted to test the plane before delivery.

None of them suffered severe injuries. The cause of the crash remains unclear.

The aircraft was scheduled to be delivered next week to Etihad Airways’ Abu Dhabi base, the airline said.

Source: BBC News"

These are pictures of the wreck of a brand new A340-600, in November 2007. It had never flown, brand spanking new right out of the hangar, without a single hour of air time. Enter the Arab flight crew. Thank the French and their Arab friends for this bit of 'comedy of errors'. Nine employees of the Arab airline were in the aircraft, but not one employee from French Airbus was present. The Arabs taxied out to the run-up area. Then they took all four engines to takeoff power with virtually an empty aircraft. This was their first mistake as they obviously didn't read the run-up manuals. They had no clue just how light an empty Airbus really is.

No chocks were set, not that it would have mattered at that power setting. The brakes will not hold it back at full power anyway. As it turns out, the takeoff warning horn was blaring away in the cockpit because they had all 4 engines at full power. The aircraft computers thought they were trying to takeoff but it had not been configured properly (flaps/slats, etc, etc). Then one of these brain surgeons decided to pull the 'Ground Sense' circuit breaker to silence the alarms. This fools the aircraft into thinking it is in the air.

That was their last mistake. As soon as they did that, the computers automatically released all the brakes and set the aircraft rocketing forward. The poor b*stards had no idea that this is a safety feature so that pilots can't land with the brakes on. There was no time to stop and no one smart enough to throttle back the engines from their max power setting.

Now back on topic. THAI never buy new planes so there's no chance of this happening when they go test a new one before delivery.

They also got a good price on this one once it came back from the panel beaters.

Edited June 18, 2011 by NanLaew

[trotbot]

Thai has some issues with how much it can invest, so it is always behind best in class airlines for modernisation. The popular regional flights (HK, SG, Shanghai) use A330s or 777, which typically are the new business class seats. The shorter, less popular flights are on the old A330s or even the really old A300s (which still have chemical toilets and the worst leg room of any plane outside of the US).

The Thai crews have got a lot better recently in business, and they are without exception friendly and competent. If you want eye candy, fly on SQ.

[IMA_FARANG]

I guess what you consider "bad" depends on your point of view.

When I worked in Greece there were only two direct flights from Athens to Bangkok.

One was Thai International and the other one was Olympic, the Greek airline.

Thai left at 1630 from Athens and arrived the next morning in Bangkok.

Olympic left later and got to Thailand later in the day.

So if you took the Olympic flight half your day was already gone when you got to Bangkok.

Now which one would you have taken?

:jap:

[Crushdepth]

The planes are mostly old with no in flight entertainment systems even in business class and small cramped seats.

Are you crazy? Thai is the last airline that still has decent leg room in economy. Oh you're in business...stop yer whining!

My experience on a 'modern' Emirates plane was awful. The seats were so close together you can't move if the person in front reclines.

Edited June 18, 2011 by Crushdepth

[mrtoad]

I haven't flown with Thai on a long haul flight since 2005 (BKK-LHR) - I just found them vastly over priced for the quality that is provided, both service and also the actual planes. I have flown domestic many, many times - but that is more often than not to do with convenience as a opposed to prices. I fly Bangkok Airways at least once a month (BKK-Trat), and find them to be very good value and they would generally be my first choice on other routes in Thailand and the region as well.

For Long Haul - I do prefer direct flights, which does limit somewhat but have found EVA to be good. My last flight to LHR was with QANTAS, and I was pleasantly surprised as they had been on my no list since 2005.

I think THAI is just over weighed with beuracracy and jobs for the connected, as opposed to giving jobs on merit. My fav airline though is still SQ.

[jocko]

I need to go to the UK and Thai were asking around 53,000 per person, the company I work with

got prices of 35,000baht, and this is flying this Tuesday. However, I still prefer Qatar, Eva or Egypt for prices. Also Etihad hava a deal running for around 27,000per person, but am on a waiting list for that.

I agree with you as in March i went to a travel agent in Thailand to buy a ticket for my Thai wife to make her first trip to the UK next month so as she was making the journey on her own i thought best to use Thai when the agent looked up the prices Thai was the dearest of all so he looked at other airlines and found a flight with BA 10000b cheaper and we know BA is usually more expensive so as a wanted a direct flight i paid the money for the flight and was thinking what a rip off for Thai people who want to fly Thai as i know from the past i can get good price from Thai Lon/Ban i have never known BA to be cheaper than Thai or Singapore on this route, but low and behold she gets a phone call from the travel agent last week to tell her he has booked a new flight with Thai for the same price.

So there you go BTW Thai air hostess look fine to me after walking the streets in the UK for a few months and see the state of some .

[ScubaBuddha]

are you kidding me?? thai airways is an absolute gem of an airline when it comes to service and the ladies are so preeeety try flying air canada ,last time i had 2 different ladies serving me in business class , they must of been all of 65

I can relate to all these comments comparing Asian carriers to western ones. I have flown pretty much all the Asian carriers at one time or another. The Asian crews are hyper polite to the point of being almost robotic. When I fly home I often fly the AA/JAL codeshare and when I step on to the AA plane in Tokyo, the contrast is staggering. The crotchety old union backed stewardesses couldn't give a sh%t about politeness or customer service. I've watched them downright verbally abuse the Asian passengers because they know they can.

And I don't mind the buses if it cuts down on the fare, which Air Asia uses as well.

[tartempion]

For some reason this has always put me off flying Etihad.

Please stop your ridiculous comments.

That accident was caused by a pre-delivery error made by Airbus people, that plane was not yet delivered to Etihad Airways:

Airbus and French authorities launched an investigation Friday into an accident involving an A340-600 carrying out engine runup tests at the manufacturer’s Saint-Martin site near Toulouse ahead of the aircraft’s scheduled delivery to Etihad Airways. The jet, carrying nine people, apparently crashed through a barrier. Photographs show the badly damaged A340, bearing Etihad livery, nearly split in two, with the destroyed cockpit and nose area of the fuselage mostly severed.

Airbus called the incident “regrettable” and said five people were injured, with three remaining hospitalized as of Friday. One is an employee of Abu Dhabi Aircraft Technologies while the other two work for Airbus, the manufacturer said. It said the aircraft was to be delivered “in the coming days,” adding, “Ground tests including engine runups are a normal procedure on all Airbus aircraft.” The plane was one of two -600s headed to EY before year end. It already operates two of the type.

Source: ATW online

[NxaiPan]

It's not that TG is a bad airline, it just should & could be so much better.

Losing control of a subsidiary company (Nok Air), the shambolic Thai Tiger fiasco and now a third attempt at a low cost operator is planned for 2012.

Such poor management underlies the reason that TG is not a leading global brand similar to SQ or CX.

Perhaps there are deeper reasons which would explain why LOS is yet to produce a top global company in any field.

[NxaiPan]

It's not that TG is a bad airline, it just should & could be so much better.

Losing control of a subsidiary company (Nok Air), the shambolic Thai Tiger fiasco and now a third attempt at a low cost operator is planned for 2012.

Such poor management underlies the reason that TG is not a leading global brand similar to SQ or CX.

Perhaps there are deeper reasons which would explain why LOS is yet to produce a top global company in any field.

[Dellboy218]

For some reason this has always put me off flying Etihad.

Please stop your ridiculous comments.

That accident was caused by a pre-delivery error made by Airbus people, that plane was not yet delivered to Etihad Airways:

Airbus and French authorities launched an investigation Friday into an accident involving an A340-600 carrying out engine runup tests at the manufacturer's Saint-Martin site near Toulouse ahead of the aircraft's scheduled delivery to Etihad Airways. The jet, carrying nine people, apparently crashed through a barrier. Photographs show the badly damaged A340, bearing Etihad livery, nearly split in two, with the destroyed cockpit and nose area of the fuselage mostly severed.

Airbus called the incident "regrettable" and said five people were injured, with three remaining hospitalized as of Friday. One is an employee of Abu Dhabi Aircraft Technologies while the other two work for Airbus, the manufacturer said. It said the aircraft was to be delivered "in the coming days," adding, "Ground tests including engine runups are a normal procedure on all Airbus aircraft." The plane was one of two -600s headed to EY before year end. It already operates two of the type.

Source: ATW online

Actually it was comment, just one and it depends on which report you read. Original reports said that 9 Etihad crew were onboard and that photos of it were banned in the UAE. True or not who knows but it would not be the first time that facts had been doctored. So I presume because of your agressive reply you lost shares or your job because of it. Well to get back to topic, after working for many year in the UAE I am happier flying with Thai even with the elderly aircraft.

[eric26bkk]

Why do people feel it necessary to criticize the complaints this writer has with Thai Airways? For the longest time, I never understood why Thai Airways held such high rankings amongst international airlines. The points he makes are valid. Living in the USA, I always am happy to fly on Asian carriers because they do have much more attractive attendants in the aisles, makes the flight that much more enjoyable. Traveling on older aircraft is a strong negative, especially when the competitors have a younger fleet at more competitive fares. Finally, one would expect the home based airline not to have to have buses take the passengers to the terminal after a long flight.

I agree with the writer on his points, with the competition the way it is, it is a simple and valid question, Why is Thai Airways such a bad airline?

[THAILIBAN]

If you want to know old ugly hosties (and with attitude) try flying Qantas or BA. Thai is an absolute dream compared to those two.

[irishken]

are these flights for free. if your company makes you fly them then i'm sure they are paying for them. so you cant really complain. flying the world for free is not a bad life style.

and of the ethiad bashing. i have flown them from dub-bkk and taught they were great. just one of the cabin crew (a man) was the only the negative, but thats just nit picking.

will be flying malaysian airlnes dub-kul first time in jan. hope they are good.looking at seatguru i see they have about 6 or 7 rows less crammed into there 747 so should be comfy but maybe thai have less business or first class than malay

Edited June 20, 2011 by irishken

[Razzler1973]

For Air Stewardesses that are mooses chuck any North American airline in there too.

I don't use Thai airways but no inflight entertainment in this day and age is ridiculous. I am a simple person, just want my own TV and some beers for the flight.

Also, don't use Gulf Air, they are shockingly poor! From Dubai I always use Virgin to the UK and to Bangkok I tend to use Singapore or Qatar or whoever has a good deal (which is never Thai!)

[Indegestion]

If you want to know old ugly hosties (and with attitude) try flying Qantas or BA. Thai is an absolute dream compared to those two.

I clicked for a Pair of Shirtlifters on B.A.,id prefered Grab a Grannie any Day.

[trotbot]

<br />Why do people feel it necessary to criticize the complaints this writer has with Thai Airways?  For the longest time, I never understood why Thai Airways held such high rankings amongst international airlines.  The points he makes are valid.  Living in the USA, I always am happy to fly on Asian carriers because they do have much more attractive attendants in the aisles, makes the flight that much more enjoyable.  Traveling on older aircraft is a strong negative, especially when the competitors have a younger fleet at more competitive fares.  Finally, one would expect the home based airline not to have to have buses take the passengers to the terminal after a long flight.<br /><br />I agree with the writer on his points, with the competition the way it is, it is a simple and valid question, Why is Thai Airways such a bad airline?<br />

<br /><br /><br />

Never understand why people complain about the bus at Swampy. It is so much better than getting off at C10, or even C4. The only sensible walks are from D, and that is never on Thai. I guess it helps that I get on the first bus, but even so, it has to be easier?

[stefb1964]

Hi,

Although I have no idea where you are from nor what nationality you hold, but if you complain about the service on board of TG airplanes and the age of the people serving you, I only could recommend you to try out AA, Continental, US Airways, Delta Airlines or maybe a few other US airlines flying intercontinental. If you are convinced TH hostesses are your mother's age, than the hostesses on the US carriers might look as old as your grandmother. It already seems to hurt them when smiling, contrary to the mothers on TG.

As for the inflight entertainment, you're right about that when flying on the old intercontinental B747's and B737 fleet, but it's a entirely different story when flying on board of the B777 or A340 (I assume even the A330) fleet.

About their fares.. well take it or leave it. It's only a matter of CHOICE. That simple.

Stef

[tw25rw]

I recently booked a few days in Kuala Lumpur using ff miles. Then found they had a sale on and I could have bought them for half the miles but their system didn't factor this in. I'm now trying to cancel the whole thing so I can rebook, but the ROP people have done a disappearing act.

[MRToMRT]

"Im a gold member royal orchid frequent flyer with Thai airways- and my conclusion is Thai airways sucks big time, especially compared to other regional airlines (Singapore, Cathay, Emirates).

The planes are mostly old with no in flight entertainment systems even in business class and small cramped seats."

I agree 100% with you re business class - try the Delhi route, the planes are old old 747s with seats out of the 70s. The UK route is marginally better. The manila route sucks. Thai still has a long way to go if it wants to be as good as it thinks it is.

I like the older hostesses though.

[trotbot]

<br /><font color="#0000FF">"Im a gold member royal orchid frequent flyer with Thai airways- and my  conclusion is Thai airways sucks big time, especially compared to other  regional airlines (Singapore, Cathay, Emirates). <br /><br />The planes are mostly old with <b>no in flight entertainment systems</b> even in business class and small cramped seats."</font><br /><br />I agree 100% with you re business class - try the Delhi route, the planes are old old 747s with seats out of the 70s. The UK route is marginally better. The manila route sucks. Thai still has a long way to go if it wants to be as good as it thinks it is.<br /><br />I like the older hostesses though.<br />

<br /><br /><br />

Its a straight competition question. The newest long haul have to go on Euro and Aus routes, as the competition is BA, LH, SQ, AF etc. India and Manila, not so much competition on direct flights. The morning flight to Manila is usually a 777 with new seats, the afternoon flight is occasionally the dreaded A300 with chemical toilets, but more often an A330 with personal screens in buiness but no interactive choice of what to watch

[baboon]

If the F/A is friendly and not averse to serving beer,I really could not give a rat`s ass about his/her sex or age.

Give me a former tyre fitter who is happy to have a chat in the galley over a surly supermodel wannabe any day of the week.

[ExpatJ]

If the F/A is friendly and not averse to serving beer,I really could not give a rat`s ass about his/her sex or age.

Give me a former tyre fitter who is happy to have a chat in the galley over a surly supermodel wannabe any day of the week.

I disagree-

A chat lasts 5 minutes- a bodaciously hot air hostess is a feast for the eyes that lasts for the whole flight.

[baboon]

Blimey! You`re like a Tom cat with 3 testicles!