I am not computer literate enough to do this but how about someone sets up a site (like the ones to the prime minister) to Thai Airways about the LHR/BKK route and emphasising the Thai connection with T-UK and how many members choose EVA/ETIHAD/GULF/EMIRATES etc and not TG (may help with planes if not prices )

Just a thought and ready in Essex to be shot down
colin 244

Well they should know why we are choosing other airlines!

I say vote with your feet. Better than any petition!

Packpao

Slightly(!?) off topic, but does anyone know why only 4 airlines have LHR-BKK as a direct route?

Thai Air is self-explanatory and BA/Qantas en route to Oz is obvious, but Eva?

Have others not sought it and is that because it's not seen as economically viable?

I'm only having a guess here so may be totally incorrect.

I personally don't think they have any trouble filling most direct flights to Thailand. In addition the 'Kangaroo' route is extremely popular all year round.

I think the reason that Thai won't upgrade LHR/BKK planes is simply because it doesn't need to and it doesn't suit their plans.

Of course they will eventually as the aircraft go out of their service, but until then what do they really lose? I've been saying they are rubbish for years, usually I've been met with howls of opposition because loads of people seem to like them.

Most other long haul routes get something like this (or even nicer I'm led to believe in their new 777's)

http://www.airliners.net/photo/Thai-Airways-Internation...nternational/1243297

quote:

but Eva?

Purely a guess but EVA's decision to do LHR-BKK-TPE (or LGW-VIE-BKK-TPE as it was at launch) route might have been partly due to freight. At one stage, almost all their 747s on the LHR-BKK-TPE route were the Combi variety (747-400M) - a third of the aircraft dedicated to freight.

They moved away from 747s a couple of years ago but I understand they are now reintroducing them in a 3-class configuraiton (without First class).

Packpao

quote:

Slightly(!?) off topic, but does anyone know why only 4 airlines have LHR-BKK as a direct route?

Only !!!

Look at most other cities in the world and you'll see that 4 is a lot, until de-regultion next month even New York only has 4.

At least there are direct flights from Heathrow. No direct flight at all from Manchester or Birmingham.

Just got back from bkk last night with Eva air, nice new plane, great service, £100 ish cheaper than Thai when we booked and the Eva staff...Wow!!! Why anybody still uses Thai airways is beyond me!!!

QUOTE] Wow!!! Why anybody still uses Thai airways is beyond me!!! [/QUOTE]

Yeah - I have been an advocate for Eva for a while - but what you are up against is the "BRAND" power of all things Thai to Thai people

- Skippy

Skippy, I'm not sure that's the case anymore, when Ooy first travelled here in 10/06 the advice she got from the Thai languauge section - mainly Thai females - was to use Eva.

quote:

Most other long haul routes get something like this (or even nicer I'm led to believe in their new 777's)

Now that is impressive but perhaps the Americans demand it to let TG into USA as I believe its a relatively new route for TG as is the Moscow route

On Skippy's comment I tend to agree especially as the UK husband/fiance/boy or girlfriend is paying and most Thai's in LOS have only heard of TG/Nok/One to Go etc (well in our house and Phitsanulok Provice anyway)

I have pointed out EVA to Dao who is staunchly TG but one of her mates has just come back to UK on EVA so who knows

Also Dao's sister (lives in France) has just done a LOS trip with husband and flew Etihad which prompted the comment "her husband is a cheap charlie" Oh dear me
colin 244

I dont think Skippy is right either give most Thai's the choice to save money and they will happily dumb Thai airways. We will probably use Eva this year as it is direct and easier for Lek with the baby otherwise we Have been using Qatar which I have to say are excellent

quote:

Originally posted by Keith&Mol:

quote:

Slightly(!?) off topic, but does anyone know why only 4 airlines have LHR-BKK as a direct route?

Only !!!

Look at most other cities in the world and you'll see that 4 is a lot, until de-regultion next month even New York only has 4.

four is a lot for most cities, but new york actually has six from heathrow if u count air india and kuwait airways. i wonder whether either government protection for ba and tg or lack of slots at bkk is preventing virgin from flying to bkk, or whether it's simply a commercial decision.

ian.

Having had a think, it occurs to me that the Middle East airlines have their hubs here, and because of the number of expatriates working in the Gulf, have flights from here to Europe, and from here to the Far East.

It makes economic sense to fill the unused seats with passengers who want to go from Europe (and beyond) to the Far East via the Middle East hubs, for a discount on the direct flights.

Having said that, currently the cheapest way for us to travel to Bangkok is from here to Dubai on Gulf Air, and from Dubai to Bangkok on Thai Airways (obviously the stopover does make it cheaper, as Bahrain to Bangkok is a direct flight for us).