Suvarnabhumi Voted 10Th Best Airport Of The World

[geriatrickid]

I'm going to go against the prevailing sentiment and sing the joys of Hong Kong. I use it now as my hub. My praise is attributable to (in no particular order);

1. Quick and efficient immigration

2. Faster baggage delivery than BKK

3. Security

4. Transportation via taxi or train is a pleasure compared to the travesty of BKK. (what a pleasure to get in a proper taxi and not be harassed by touts.)

5. Fantastic transfer desk services where the staff are fluent in English and will do whatever they can to help

6. Corruption oes not intrude on the airport's operations

7. Clean, clean, clean

8. No matter how busy, it doesn't seem crowded.

9. The duty free prices are comparable to the city centre and the variety of merchandise makes the airport the most convenient shopping mall in the world. Plus, there is no fear of the scams associated with BKK.

I know SIN is good, and offers many of the above, but the airport is getting a bit long in the tooth and even the locals are starting to make that suggestion. Mind you, this is like comparing a Bentley and a Rolls Royce.

Edited April 29, 2012 by geriatrickid

[exeter]

Besides being the 10th best airport of the world

A barefaced lie.

Give or take a few places!

[Theboy]

OK, for the Thai bashers, it's 10th in it's class. Feel any better now?

I reckon Suvarnabhumi the second best airport in the world as is means I am so much closer closer to my chosen home. Top award goes to Udon International because it is a 10 minute drive from home and their brilliant airport security allows the incredibly young, stunningly beautiful and very talented Mrs NL to park right outside the door in the pax drop-off zone and leave the car totally unattended while she comes to meet me.

Now, I am off for breakfast.... where's my rose-tinted glasses?

PS. Another huge, HUGE bonus is that I can fly THAI three times a day between these two airports and leave the alternatives of Nok and AirAsia to the hopelessly impoverished, terminally challenged and those that would normally take a bus. Apart from the odd TEFL'er and Vientiane visa-runner, there's a much, MUCH better class of hoipoloi on THAI IMHO.

Just what have you been smoking !

[Yunla]

Amsterdam Schiphol deserves its place in that list, its clean & spacious & efficient. I also like KL Airport Malaysia a lot, had to spend 13 hours there once & actually enjoyed it.

Worst / best airports should always be judged by the surrounding country & lives of the locals imo. If it is poor or rich etc. Some poor countries make a lot of effort to have a good main airport, even if it isn't very hi-so it works and they are helpful. I would put Bkk airport partly in that category, I always got help when I needed it in Bkk airport & never had to wait massively long time. As other posters say I love the Bkk airport because I remember all the times I've flown in & its been sunny & my friends live near the airport. I guess its a personal thing based on what you associate the different airports with.

Worst airports for me are London Heathrow and Leeds-Bradford, not saying that to put the UK down, those airports are overcrowded, stressful and grim & mournful.

Edited April 29, 2012 by Yunla

[zydeco]

It's a godsend compared to LA. Last year with over 2 hours between my international flight from Bangkok and my domestic connection to St. Louis I still managed to miss my domestic flight. For one thing there was this impossibly long line at U.S. customs. Eventually I managed to talk one of the employees into letting me jump ahead of the line due to the timing of my domestic flight. Was unable to get on standby flight and had to pay full price for an entirely new ticket not to mention having to stay at a hotel for the night. No direct flights to St. Louis by the way, which used to have the busiest train station in the entire world. Had to fly to Atlanta then wait over 2 hours in the airport, and finally I got to fly backwards to St. Louis.

Oftentimes I've had to wait at the L.A. airport for 8 or 9 hours for my domestic flight. First thing to close are the book stores. So no new magazines, paperbacks, etc. Restaurants all close by 1 a.m. or so. Can't even sit in McDonalds drinking coffee while waiting for a 6 a.m. flight. For over five years now LAX looks like a construction zone. Aside from the long line at U.S. customs contributing causes to my missing my flight were the shuttle bus after landing having to drive a very long distance for a ridiculous amount of time getting from the landing strip to the terminal and the great difficulty I had just being able to find the ticket counter for my domestic flight. Believe me, Suvanarnabumi is a total class act compared to LAX. I can easily get help throughout the airport from personnel who seem anxious to please, taxis are both cheap and plentiful, meals are much cheaper and better there than in U.S. airports, and the restaurants, shops and bookstores never seem to close. And for those who do smoke, there's plenty of smoking rooms that are conveniently located.

Go through Seattle. The customs lines are usually short and the wait brief.

[wintermute]

For people that have been flying in and out of Swampy the past year can tell you that the quality of the airport has dropped off sharply. Immigration and security officials all behaving in an unprofessional manner. Long lines during most hours during passport control and an insane amount of cutting and pushing.

[xthAi76s]

Suvarnabhumi is a dump. It is actually unfinished. Read about it. The scandals surrounding the money and contracting are legendary. The airport staff are quite nice, however. True Thai style. A smile and willingness to help are very important.

To rebut a few points made in earlier posts --

1. When comparing airports you should take into consideration the age of the airport. Suvarnabhumi is not so old, but nonetheless is it terribly built. It feels like a dimly lit bunker of sorts. Certainly it feels nothing like a modern, relatively new flagship airport.

2. Someone said you have to take into consideration whether a country is poor or not. Well, in the case of Thailand, surely we all know most PEOPLE are poor here. However, the COUNTRY/GOVERNMENT is far from poor, so I don't see that a valid excuse. Look at China's airport in Beijing. It's massive, beautiful, efficient and quite a pleasure to go through. Countries show off to an extent in building their flagship international airports. You'd expect so much more from a country like Thailand who has spent the better part of a century working the international tourism market.

3. Someone tried to compare the Suvarnabhumi to some of the US airports... OK, sure, there are crap airports in the US. BUT, please remember the following:

1. The US has the oldest and most airports of any country on Earth.

2. The US is beyond the point where it needs to rely on nice airports to gain FACE in the international community. It's a rich country, beyond these silly things.

3. The US has two of the busiest airports in the world (Atlanta and Chicago) which are in fact decent airports.

4. Generally British/US/Scandinavian culture places more emphasis on function rather than form. Asia is exactly the opposite, so you'd expect not to find very pretty or 'nice' airports in these countries. I mean, to put it plainly, people in the US would rather invent the planes (which they did) and the airports (which they did) and the computer systems (which they did) and let the FACE savers reach into their corrupt mafia-style governments budgets to 'pretty up' their airports in countries trying to make statements that 'they've arrived'.

5. When was the last time you flew into an international airport in the US and had to deboard the plane onto a bunch of hot, packed busses to get to your gate? I am shocked that this seems to be the standard here in Thailand. They can't get the numbers or logistics right so that the planes can be taken right up to the gates. It's rather pathetic. Did not happen to me at Beijing, just as an example.

So, in summary, the staff in Suvarnabhumi are largely great. Typical of well-trained Thai staff. Very polite, helpful and it certainly doesn't hurt that the women tend to be easy on the eyes. The facilities, however, are 'bottom of the barrel'. Cheap looking and feeling. Dreary is a good word to describe the place. With poor lighting and often inadequate air conditioning. The duty free gives new comers an immediate taste for the scams and ripoffs they can expect as they embark on their journeys into Thailand. It's just an awful airport. As bad structurally and in feel as JFK (although JFK is much, much older).

Edited April 29, 2012 by xthAi76s

[ang]

Suvarnabhumi only a 3 star airport. Even Copenhagen Denmark got 4 stars. Honest I do find Suvarnabhumi quit boring and not very beautiful.

[Unkomoncents]

Suvarnabhumi is a dump. It is actually unfinished. Read about it. The scandals surrounding the money and contracting are legendary. The airport staff are quite nice, however. True Thai style. A smile and willingness to help are very important.

To rebut a few points made in earlier posts --

1. When comparing airports you should take into consideration the age of the airport. Suvarnabhumi is not so old, but nonetheless is it terribly built. It feels like a dimly lit bunker of sorts. Certainly it feels nothing like a modern, relatively new flagship airport.

2. Someone said you have to take into consideration whether a country is poor or not. Well, in the case of Thailand, surely we all know most PEOPLE are poor here. However, the COUNTRY/GOVERNMENT is far from poor, so I don't see that a valid excuse. Look at China's airport in Beijing. It's massive, beautiful, efficient and quite a pleasure to go through. Countries show off to an extent in building their flagship international airports. You'd expect so much more from a country like Thailand who has spent the better part of a century working the international tourism market.

3. Someone tried to compare the Suvarnabhumi to some of the US airports... OK, sure, there are crap airports in the US. BUT, please remember the following:

1. The US has the oldest and most airports of any country on Earth.

2. The US is beyond the point where it needs to rely on nice airports to gain FACE in the international community. It's a rich country, beyond these silly things.

3. The US has two of the busiest airports in the world (Atlanta and Chicago) which are in fact decent airports.

4. Generally British/US/Scandinavian culture places more emphasis on function rather than form. Asia is exactly the opposite, so you'd expect not to find very pretty or 'nice' airports in these countries. I mean, to put it plainly, people in the US would rather invent the planes (which they did) and the airports (which they did) and the computer systems (which they did) and let the FACE savers reach into their corrupt mafia-style governments budgets to 'pretty up' their airports in countries trying to make statements that 'they've arrived'.

5. When was the last time you flew into an international airport in the US and had to deboard the plane onto a bunch of hot, packed busses to get to your gate? I am shocked that this seems to be the standard here in Thailand. They can't get the numbers or logistics right so that the planes can be taken right up to the gates. It's rather pathetic. Did not happen to me at Beijing, just as an example.

So, in summary, the staff in Suvarnabhumi are largely great. Typical of well-trained Thai staff. Very polite, helpful and it certainly doesn't hurt that the women tend to be easy on the eyes. The facilities, however, are 'bottom of the barrel'. Cheap looking and feeling. Dreary is a good word to describe the place. With poor lighting and often inadequate air conditioning. The duty free gives new comers an immediate taste for the scams and ripoffs they can expect as they embark on their journeys into Thailand. It's just an awful airport. As bad structurally and in feel as JFK (although JFK is much, much older).

I found Beijing to be a real problem, though, if you try to use US credit cards or if you want to exchange a small amount of money for food or newspapers (they want you to use Yuan in the airport but they don't follow an exchange rate; they charge a flat fee for any exchange, which makes small denomination airport purchases quite expensive). Also, some of the signage is misleading and it can be difficult to follow the logic of the airport's organization. For my flight to Canada, we boarded the plane on the runway after taking a shuttle bus (I was surprised that we had to go up stairs on wheels to board the plane at one of the newest, most impressive airports in the world). Also, Chinese immigration puts a stamp in your passport even if you are only in transit through the Beijing airport. They clearly have not adopted the mentality nor the goal of the "transit hub" yet. Nevertheless, still a much better experience than is the norm at Suvarnabhumi. The airports lighting is terrible but the worst, most insulting parts are the immigration checkpoints and the extortionist prices being charged by the incredibly audacious staff in the "duty free" shops (quotes are necessary because they're more like duty imposed, four times, shops).

Edited April 29, 2012 by Unkomoncents

[phl]

Personally i could not care less if its 10th or first. i do not live in the airport nor do i spend my time off there.

What i do not really understand is that for weeks if not months, there were a number of posts and news about Suva being a chaos, under staffed, runways problems, etc etc etc

Now all over sudden it is voted 10th?????

So does that mean that the people who vote never experienced any problems mentioned? or does it mean that other airports are in MUCH worse shapes?

[Nigel1500]

Suvarnabhumi only a 3 star airport. Even Copenhagen Denmark got 4 stars. Honest I do find Suvarnabhumi quit boring and not very beautiful.

The star rating system is more reliable than the World Airport Awards. The awards are the result of passenger survey they can be influenced by the type of passengers surveyed, the reason for their travel and the time the survey is done, and airports and airlines actively promoting the survey.

[bigbamboo]

Having spent many years in the travel business I've seen a lot of airports in my time, too many if I'm honest, and if I were to rank them all Suvanabhumi would be in the bottom half of the table.

[Beaneater]

Suvarnabhumi is a dump. It is actually unfinished. Read about it. The scandals surrounding the money and contracting are legendary. The airport staff are quite nice, however. True Thai style. A smile and willingness to help are very important.

To rebut a few points made in earlier posts --

1. When comparing airports you should take into consideration the age of the airport. Suvarnabhumi is not so old, but nonetheless is it terribly built. It feels like a dimly lit bunker of sorts. Certainly it feels nothing like a modern, relatively new flagship airport.

2. Someone said you have to take into consideration whether a country is poor or not. Well, in the case of Thailand, surely we all know most PEOPLE are poor here. However, the COUNTRY/GOVERNMENT is far from poor, so I don't see that a valid excuse. Look at China's airport in Beijing. It's massive, beautiful, efficient and quite a pleasure to go through. Countries show off to an extent in building their flagship international airports. You'd expect so much more from a country like Thailand who has spent the better part of a century working the international tourism market.

3. Someone tried to compare the Suvarnabhumi to some of the US airports... OK, sure, there are crap airports in the US. BUT, please remember the following:

1. The US has the oldest and most airports of any country on Earth.

2. The US is beyond the point where it needs to rely on nice airports to gain FACE in the international community. It's a rich country, beyond these silly things.

3. The US has two of the busiest airports in the world (Atlanta and Chicago) which are in fact decent airports.

4. Generally British/US/Scandinavian culture places more emphasis on function rather than form. Asia is exactly the opposite, so you'd expect not to find very pretty or 'nice' airports in these countries. I mean, to put it plainly, people in the US would rather invent the planes (which they did) and the airports (which they did) and the computer systems (which they did) and let the FACE savers reach into their corrupt mafia-style governments budgets to 'pretty up' their airports in countries trying to make statements that 'they've arrived'.

5. When was the last time you flew into an international airport in the US and had to deboard the plane onto a bunch of hot, packed busses to get to your gate? I am shocked that this seems to be the standard here in Thailand. They can't get the numbers or logistics right so that the planes can be taken right up to the gates. It's rather pathetic. Did not happen to me at Beijing, just as an example.

So, in summary, the staff in Suvarnabhumi are largely great. Typical of well-trained Thai staff. Very polite, helpful and it certainly doesn't hurt that the women tend to be easy on the eyes. The facilities, however, are 'bottom of the barrel'. Cheap looking and feeling. Dreary is a good word to describe the place. With poor lighting and often inadequate air conditioning. The duty free gives new comers an immediate taste for the scams and ripoffs they can expect as they embark on their journeys into Thailand. It's just an awful airport. As bad structurally and in feel as JFK (although JFK is much, much older).

Atlanta, are you kidding? The only good thing about the Atlanta airport is that it has a Chik-Fil-A (just try not to connect through on Sundays when it's closed). Try going from the E concourse to the T gates- a 1K walk, then 15 minute a subway ride and then another 1K walk, no moving sidewalks either (I am totally underestimating the walk distances as well). Atlanta is a very American Airport in that it resemble a huge strip mall-tacky clothes and junk food galore!

Let's look at LHR terminal 5. They obviously spent a lot of cash on it, but it really leaves one feeling cold. It is also not very well maintained-the bathrooms are pretty gross and the terminal just looks like it isn't cleaned enough. One could also say this of T3, which overall I like better. Now, do I have to even mention again what an ordeal it is to switch terminals here as one does flying from the US to Thailand on BA? Sorry, I guess I'm beating a dead horse about the 45 minute bus transfer between the two.

"The duty free gives new comers an immediate taste for the scams and ripoffs they can expect as they embark on their journeys into Thailand."

Have you ever been scammed in duty free? Referring to the most famous case of "scamming," I think the people claimed this were actually what we call "shoplifters" who then got a taste of what it is like to get arrested in Thailand.

Finally, what you call mafia in Thailand is what we call Mafia in the US-why did it take so long for a major airport to built in Newark, NJ? Because the port authority wouldn't pay off the crime families in NJ. In the UK, I believe that they call the mafia "unions" who routinely drive up the costs of public works projects like roads, bridges and airports. You shouldn't be so naive about the existence of graft in ANY major public works projects. It goes on everywhere.

The cost for T5 (the building and related infrastructure)- 4.2 billion pounds or about $6 billion . The cost for building all of BKK including terminals, runways and related infrastructure-$3.8 billion.

BKK's main failing is its absolutely scatter shot immigration process. Sometimes it is a breeze. Other times, it is a ridiculous. If they could work this major, major issue out, I think there would far less catterwalling. Let's face it, BKK will never be #1, but it is better than a lot better than people make it up to be.

[lungmi]

Zurich, Munich and Suva had the same swiss architect and designer. He didn't finish his contract for Suva. He gave up because intransparency of funds, corruption, lack of quality control, alteration of construction plans without his consent etc.

Edited April 29, 2012 by lungmi

[ALFREDO]

The first three are always in that position. I've been to all three and I reckon Changi trumps all.

Not when you arrive at Changi Low Cost Terminal! That is horrible, so long to walk! And crazy boarding process to!

[ALFREDO]

PS. Another huge, HUGE bonus is that I can fly THAI three times a day between these two airports and leave the alternatives of Nok and AirAsia to the hopelessly impoverished, terminally challenged and those that would normally take a bus. Apart from the odd TEFL'er and Vientiane visa-runner, there's a much, MUCH better class of hoipoloi on THAI IMHO.

Why would you want to fly three times a day between two airports. If you schedule with care, you might be able to get all your errands done in one trip.

You joking? Ah? -Nan Laew- ment he has the possibility to fly on three different times a day with THAI. And more times with NOK and ASIA Air

But I must say, I fly always the cheapest Airline of the day and give the saved money to the poor Isaan girls in BKK as a special TIP!

[canuckoverseas]

I'd say Suvarnabhumi is ok as as far as new airports go. However, I found the lighting inside is awfully weird, as others have stated. Did they forget to paint those concrete walls? Is there a lack of windows? Or is there just not enough lighting? The signage was odd and confusing too, like they didn't have enough of them, I kept getting lost. The place just seemed rather dark, it reminded me of airports built back in the 60's. I would compare it to the designs of many of the older airports around Africa. That said, the bathrooms were impeccably clean, and staff were all very helpful (and easy on the eyes), so these two facts alone earn the place in the top 10 I'd say.

Edited April 29, 2012 by canuckoverseas

[Skywalker69]

+1

[MEL1]

I think it's brilliant, and certainly within the top three!

The service to 'farangs' {which we are met with} and the treatment from uniformed inspectors is so unracis and it is honourable,

There is no reasonable acumen why this airport should be put down and criticized, as it is one of the best in the world.

-mel

[Skywalker69]

The actual top ten.

Suvarnabhumi is actually at number 25, down from 13 in 2011

World's Best Airports in 2012

1

Incheon International Airport

2

Singapore Changi Airport

3

Hong Kong International Airport

4

Amsterdam Schiphol Airport

5

Beijing Capital International Airport

6

Munich Airport

7

Zurich Airport

8

Kuala Lumpur International Airport

9

Vancouver International Airport

10

Central Japan International Airport\

Those results from the website in the OP.

They must have gone by this list.

http://www.worldairportawards.com/Awards_2012/airports_30_50million.htm

[retarius]

The actual top ten.

Suvarnabhumi is actually at number 25, down from 13 in 2011

World's Best Airports in 2012

1

Incheon International Airport

2

Singapore Changi Airport

3

Hong Kong International Airport

4

Amsterdam Schiphol Airport

5

Beijing Capital International Airport

6

Munich Airport

7

Zurich Airport

8

Kuala Lumpur International Airport

9

Vancouver International Airport

10

Central Japan International Airport\

Those results from the website in the OP.

You know I thought there was something fishy about the headline....how could this crummy airport with its enormous queues for immigration and too few toilets rank higher than say, Lagos Airport

[xthAi76s]

The actual top ten.

Suvarnabhumi is actually at number 25, down from 13 in 2011

World's Best Airports in 2012

1

Incheon International Airport

2

Singapore Changi Airport

3

Hong Kong International Airport

4

Amsterdam Schiphol Airport

5

Beijing Capital International Airport

6

Munich Airport

7

Zurich Airport

8

Kuala Lumpur International Airport

9

Vancouver International Airport

10

Central Japan International Airport\

Those results from the website in the OP.

You know I thought there was something fishy about the headline....how could this crummy airport with its enormous queues for immigration and too few toilets rank higher than say, Lagos Airport

As one poster pointed out, this particular rating is from passenger surveys, so, in one sense meaningful, but in another sense destined to be rather imprecise. Also, it is influenced by how aggressively the airport pushes the survey... Thailand NEEDS these kinds of tourism ratings, so the AOT pushes the survey quite seriously. Also, it helps that many of the kinds of tourists who come here for the first or perhaps second time are men who are just dazzled with the fact that after two weeks around Thailand they've had sex with 4x as many beautiful women as they'd ever even spoken to in their home countries. I bet they get caught in a rather decent mood. Sex sells, man.

[NanLaew]

Zurich, Munich and Suva had the same swiss architect and designer. He didn't finish his contract for Suva. He gave up because intransparency of funds, corruption, lack of quality control, alteration of construction plans without his consent etc.

Where on earth does Fiji's airport come into this?!

[mijan24]

Attn Thiavisa Forum Topic Title Writer: April Fool's is on the 1st of April, not the 29th.

I travel a ton, and I aim to spend as little time in transit as possible, but when you need to get in and out fast, Suvarnabhumi ain't it. And when you are stuck there for a few hours, the areas for rest and dining are pretty sad, indeed. This is why places like Singapore and Vancouver get in the REAL top 10. They are good at everything. Suvarnabhumi isn't even close.

Absolutely.

Phnom Penh Poechentong is even a better airport than Suvarnabhumi.

Wau airport in PNG gives swampy a run for its money - never mind you are flying into the side of a mountain and to assist takeoff the runway runs downhill which assists takeoffs most of the time. - Views are wonderful and the scream of the white pilot which signals the National 1st officer to haul back on the steering devices gets you into the right mood for a quick trip to Port Moresby.

Wau google it just for the adventure. No big Ques its everybody for themselves they work on 1st in best seated.

Edited April 29, 2012 by mijan24

[Skywalker69]

The actual top ten.

Suvarnabhumi is actually at number 25, down from 13 in 2011

World's Best Airports in 2012

1

Incheon International Airport

2

Singapore Changi Airport

3

Hong Kong International Airport

4

Amsterdam Schiphol Airport

5

Beijing Capital International Airport

6

Munich Airport

7

Zurich Airport

8

Kuala Lumpur International Airport

9

Vancouver International Airport

10

Central Japan International Airport\

Those results from the website in the OP.

You know I thought there was something fishy about the headline....how could this crummy airport with its enormous queues for immigration and too few toilets rank higher than say, Lagos Airport

Here is the list.

http://www.worldairportawards.com/Awards_2012/airports_30_50million.htm

Thailand on 10 place.

[Unkomoncents]

Suvarnabhumi is a dump. It is actually unfinished. Read about it. The scandals surrounding the money and contracting are legendary. The airport staff are quite nice, however. True Thai style. A smile and willingness to help are very important.

To rebut a few points made in earlier posts --

1. When comparing airports you should take into consideration the age of the airport. Suvarnabhumi is not so old, but nonetheless is it terribly built. It feels like a dimly lit bunker of sorts. Certainly it feels nothing like a modern, relatively new flagship airport.

2. Someone said you have to take into consideration whether a country is poor or not. Well, in the case of Thailand, surely we all know most PEOPLE are poor here. However, the COUNTRY/GOVERNMENT is far from poor, so I don't see that a valid excuse. Look at China's airport in Beijing. It's massive, beautiful, efficient and quite a pleasure to go through. Countries show off to an extent in building their flagship international airports. You'd expect so much more from a country like Thailand who has spent the better part of a century working the international tourism market.

3. Someone tried to compare the Suvarnabhumi to some of the US airports... OK, sure, there are crap airports in the US. BUT, please remember the following:

1. The US has the oldest and most airports of any country on Earth.

2. The US is beyond the point where it needs to rely on nice airports to gain FACE in the international community. It's a rich country, beyond these silly things.

3. The US has two of the busiest airports in the world (Atlanta and Chicago) which are in fact decent airports.

4. Generally British/US/Scandinavian culture places more emphasis on function rather than form. Asia is exactly the opposite, so you'd expect not to find very pretty or 'nice' airports in these countries. I mean, to put it plainly, people in the US would rather invent the planes (which they did) and the airports (which they did) and the computer systems (which they did) and let the FACE savers reach into their corrupt mafia-style governments budgets to 'pretty up' their airports in countries trying to make statements that 'they've arrived'.

5. When was the last time you flew into an international airport in the US and had to deboard the plane onto a bunch of hot, packed busses to get to your gate? I am shocked that this seems to be the standard here in Thailand. They can't get the numbers or logistics right so that the planes can be taken right up to the gates. It's rather pathetic. Did not happen to me at Beijing, just as an example.

So, in summary, the staff in Suvarnabhumi are largely great. Typical of well-trained Thai staff. Very polite, helpful and it certainly doesn't hurt that the women tend to be easy on the eyes. The facilities, however, are 'bottom of the barrel'. Cheap looking and feeling. Dreary is a good word to describe the place. With poor lighting and often inadequate air conditioning. The duty free gives new comers an immediate taste for the scams and ripoffs they can expect as they embark on their journeys into Thailand. It's just an awful airport. As bad structurally and in feel as JFK (although JFK is much, much older).

Atlanta, are you kidding? The only good thing about the Atlanta airport is that it has a Chik-Fil-A (just try not to connect through on Sundays when it's closed). Try going from the E concourse to the T gates- a 1K walk, then 15 minute a subway ride and then another 1K walk, no moving sidewalks either (I am totally underestimating the walk distances as well). Atlanta is a very American Airport in that it resemble a huge strip mall-tacky clothes and junk food galore!

Let's look at LHR terminal 5. They obviously spent a lot of cash on it, but it really leaves one feeling cold. It is also not very well maintained-the bathrooms are pretty gross and the terminal just looks like it isn't cleaned enough. One could also say this of T3, which overall I like better. Now, do I have to even mention again what an ordeal it is to switch terminals here as one does flying from the US to Thailand on BA? Sorry, I guess I'm beating a dead horse about the 45 minute bus transfer between the two.

"The duty free gives new comers an immediate taste for the scams and ripoffs they can expect as they embark on their journeys into Thailand."

Have you ever been scammed in duty free? Referring to the most famous case of "scamming," I think the people claimed this were actually what we call "shoplifters" who then got a taste of what it is like to get arrested in Thailand.

Finally, what you call mafia in Thailand is what we call Mafia in the US-why did it take so long for a major airport to built in Newark, NJ? Because the port authority wouldn't pay off the crime families in NJ. In the UK, I believe that they call the mafia "unions" who routinely drive up the costs of public works projects like roads, bridges and airports. You shouldn't be so naive about the existence of graft in ANY major public works projects. It goes on everywhere.

The cost for T5 (the building and related infrastructure)- 4.2 billion pounds or about $6 billion . The cost for building all of BKK including terminals, runways and related infrastructure-$3.8 billion.

BKK's main failing is its absolutely scatter shot immigration process. Sometimes it is a breeze. Other times, it is a ridiculous. If they could work this major, major issue out, I think there would far less catterwalling. Let's face it, BKK will never be #1, but it is better than a lot better than people make it up to be.

You can't compare the level of corruption in Thailand to the level of corruption in the US. It's so irritating to see people constantly doing this and then casually adding something to the effect of "It's everywhere." Yes, so is racism, AIDS, authoritarianism, etc, etc. That doesn't mean that there isn't much more of these things in some places rather than others.

[WhingeingMoaners]

Let's travel to the UK and enjoy the experience at the UK border in Heathrow.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-17880415

[KarenBravo]

I just wish they'd spell the bloody place like it's pronounced.

[xthAi76s]

I just wish they'd spell the bloody place like it's pronounced.

Yes, that would be nice, too. Or spell anything like it's pronounced.

Suvarnabhumi = SUE-WA-NA-BOOM

Go figure.

[lungmi]

Zurich, Munich and Suva had the same swiss architect and designer. He didn't finish his contract for Suva. He gave up because intransparency of funds, corruption, lack of quality control, alteration of construction plans without his consent etc.

Where on earth does Fiji's airport come into this?!

No, I mean Swampy.