Thai Airways - Always Landing At The Farthest Gates?

[greatjob]

Hi,

I fly quite often with Thai Airways to Hong Kong, Shanghai and Singapore. It seems that most of the time we land on C7 or C14, which are the farthest gates to immigration. Last time we could see a sign showing that immigration was 870 meters from the gate... When flying on United or Lufthansa, we generally land 150 to 200m from immigration.

I know this is not a big deal but when you actually need to get in town ASAP, it is a waste a time.

Any idea why Thai always chooses those gates? The evident answer is that it is cheaper but I would expect Thai Air Asia or Air Berlin / Indigo to get the cheapest gates as they are low cost airlines.

Thanks for any reply,

GJ

[lomatopo]

I believe this is an operational issue, perhaps depending more on where the arriving aircraft is next scheduled to depart from, taxi time/route from landing runway, gate availability, etc., etc.

FWIW, I have arrived on UA many, many times, and while we sometimes dock at D-2 or D-6 more recently, we have also docked at remote, bus gates and even G-5, which seems like close to 2 Km from Immigration! (They tow the aircraft back to gate D-6 for the early AM departure.) I do not believe that fixed gates vary by price and distance from Immigration. But certainly fixed gates probably cost more than remote gates, even though the costs to service remote gates must be higher for the AoT.

Anything at SBIA is better than M20 at ORD or G101 at SFO.

[Pseudolus]

I would imagine that the closer the gate is to immigration, the more expensive the charges are to the carriers. Some carriers care about their passengers and would pay the bit extra to improve their journey experience. As we know already the Thai attitude to customer satisfaction (which is how much they will put up with and how much can be screwed out of them) you can guess why Thai Airways are in the cheap seats when it comes to gates and in the expensive seats when it comes to selling their seats.

[ExpatJ]

Thai is simply trying to save money, that's the bottom line , and the passengers suffer. Its bad decision as is TGs policy of having all their business class hostesses be 40- 50 years old ++ and grumpy- unbelievable.

Edited June 21, 2012 by ExpatJ

[Gobbo]

I find that flying domestic they don't even get to dock, that's how crowded this airport is, and to think its the national carrier and charging more, but that said, I find it quicker to disembark into a transit bus and be dropped right outside the luggage collection rather than have to travel miles on travelators. Also get in before my luggage, but outbounds is a drag since they're always at A5 which is right at the end of one concourse.

[Gobbo]

On domsestic flights too, despite being the national carrier Thai don't get to dock, that's how crowded this airport is, and they cost more than others, but that said I find it quicker by transit bus to the luggage pickup, beats miles on a travelator. But on the outbounds it's dissapointing they are usually at A5 right at the end of the concourse.

[Gobbo]

On domsestic flights too, despite being the national carrier Thai don't get to dock, that's how crowded this airport is, and they cost more than others, but that said I find it quicker by transit bus to the luggage pickup, beats miles on a travelator. But on the outbounds it's dissapointing they are usually at A5 right at the end of the concourse.

[lomatopo]

There are only seven (7) gates in the D Concourse so proximity to Immigration is somewhat limited.

Remote gates, with bus transport to the terminal, are OK as you get dropped at the D concourse one level below Immigration. Of course remote gates have their own inherent challenges.

Departing BKK last week from gate D-7 I did notice two TG (Thai) aircraft, and one FD (Air Asia) docked at fixed D gates.