Jump to content

News Forum - Prediction for international travellers to Thailand lowered again


Thaiger
 Share

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, AussieBob said:

Good point.  The Thai military has more than 1,700 General equivalents which is about 1 General for every 200 troops and that is absolutely ridiculous. To example:  USA has less than 1000 General equivalents which is about 1 General for every 1500 troops.  And Thailand participates in what wars/actions, other than the problems with the terrorists down south?  

Agreed. Like many on this forum I’ve been coming to Thailand for around 25 years. I normally live in Thailand at least 6 months of the year. I’ve tried to look at how they perceive a problem and then apply their own brand of logic to the problem.  On virtually each and every occasion you can see the problems their actions will cause and assume someone will step in and correct it. Frequently nothing happens and problems persist or get worse. As a result,  I seriously think twice before boarding an aircraft flown by Thai pilots. I know they are trained to international standards and their safety record is as good as many other countries. But it’s the only time I routinely put my life in the hands of people who think in the way they do. I just feel in an emergency situation, the problem solving skills would let them down and unless automatic systems on board the aircraft got them out of the jam, then it would be disastrous. Perhaps how they perceive and work through problems and come to the conclusions they do, is what they mean by the mystifying word “Thainess”??? 

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, gummy said:

"had no idea what day it was or who they were"

Now I'm getting a bit self-conscious  😂

I thought you were going to say it was hereditary and they had passed it on to their army son.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, Soidog said:

{snipped}
Perhaps how they perceive and work through problems and come to the conclusions they do, is what they mean by the mystifying word “Thainess”??? 

I see it as an invented phrase to attempt face-saving when an embarrassing decision has been made.
<For the hard-of-learning: The text above may contain traces of sarcasm>

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, AussieBob said:

Has anyone heard of any 'tourist' arriving in Thailand since July 1, passing on Covid19 to the local Thais? I exclude all those who did not arrive from international destinations with full vaccinations and a PCR test in their home country.  Anyone? I have not heard of a single case.

If that is correct, then the problem of Covid spreading in Thailand is being caused by the non-tourists (immigrant workers, Thais seeking work, partiers, etc). Therefore, logic says that to put such stupid ignorant restrictions on international tourists is just another case of Thailand shooting itself in the foot.  Thailand should allow any vaccinated PCR tested international tourist willing to come to Thailand and take the risk of contracting Covid, to come in free of restrictions and only a basic 'application' process and no additional PCR tests.  Did I just say logic and Thailand in the one sentence??

No, but I have been advised of tourists arriving already infected. Enough to cause a stir.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

48 minutes ago, Soidog said:

Agreed. Like many on this forum I’ve been coming to Thailand for around 25 years. I normally live in Thailand at least 6 months of the year. I’ve tried to look at how they perceive a problem and then apply their own brand of logic to the problem.  On virtually each and every occasion you can see the problems their actions will cause and assume someone will step in and correct it. Frequently nothing happens and problems persist or get worse. As a result,  I seriously think twice before boarding an aircraft flown by Thai pilots. I know they are trained to international standards and their safety record is as good as many other countries. But it’s the only time I routinely put my life in the hands of people who think in the way they do. I just feel in an emergency situation, the problem solving skills would let them down and unless automatic systems on board the aircraft got them out of the jam, then it would be disastrous. Perhaps how they perceive and work through problems and come to the conclusions they do, is what they mean by the mystifying word “Thainess”??? 

I knew a american who trained pilots and he told me he saw them flying even after they failed the tests and training. Also he told they often cannot speak english while english is the language for pilots all over the world and every tower control. It was a few years ago I hope they do better now. But when they claim international standard in Thailand it means commin standard in Thailand nothing else or in other words he can fly or drive like they do in Thailand. I could go on by maintainance but I think better not.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, Bluesofa said:

I see it as an invented phrase to attempt face-saving when an embarrassing decision has been made.
<For the hard-of-learning: The text above may contain traces of sarcasm>

Could well be the case. That would explain why the authorities are full of “Thainess” 😉

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Stardust said:

I knew a american who trained pilots and he told me he saw them flying even after they failed the tests and training. Also he told they often cannot speak english while english is the language for pilots all over the world and every tower control. It was a few years ago I hope they do better now. But when they claim international standard in Thailand it means commin standard in Thailand nothing else or in other words he can fly or drive like they do in Thailand. I could go on by maintainance but I think better not.

Don't expect that everybody who fly or drive in Thailand have a valid licence.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Stardust said:

I knew a american who trained pilots and he told me he saw them flying even after they failed the tests and training. Also he told they often cannot speak english while english is the language for pilots all over the world and every tower control. It was a few years ago I hope they do better now. But when they claim international standard in Thailand it means commin standard in Thailand nothing else or in other words he can fly or drive like they do in Thailand. I could go on by maintainance but I think better not.

Don’t get me wrong,  I think the Thais are excellent when it comes to carrying out tasks for which they are trained. You can get excellent medical and dental treatment in Thailand and I’m sure products coming out of the factories are just fine. However, it’s when things don’t go to plan or as the training book showed you. Now you are in untrained and often unchartered waters. It’s at this stage people fall back on life’s experiences and their natural characterisations. That’s when I’d start to worry….

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Stardust said:

Also he told they often cannot speak english while english is the language for pilots all over the world and every tower control

Yes that’s true that English is the standard language which is used in aviation. Many pilots will use their native language when flying within their own airspace, but that is wrong and following an incident could lead to disciplinary action. Communication between aircraft and air traffic controllers is not just a two way issue. Other aircraft on the same frequency also build up a mental picture of aircraft around them and the actions they are taking. This requires a common international standard which happens to be English. It’s as much a safety issue as anything else. 
 

As an aside, I often see Thai aircraft taking off from regional airports with a tailwind if that’s the quicker and shorter route to their destination. Aircraft should of course always take off and land in to wind. I’m convinced this is done to save the fuel it requires to take off, gain altitude and then do a turn to head off to Bangkok or elsewhere. Bad practice and it will lead to an accident. 
 

Off topic I know!! 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Soidog said:

Don’t get me wrong,  I think the Thais are excellent when it comes to carrying out tasks for which they are trained. You can get excellent medical and dental treatment in Thailand and I’m sure products coming out of the factories are just fine. However, it’s when things don’t go to plan or as the training book showed you. Now you are in untrained and often unchartered waters. It’s at this stage people fall back on life’s experiences and their natural characterisations. That’s when I’d start to worry….

I agree. I am more scared of stupid actions from the government than from covid. Their incompetence and actions without thinking can destroy the country more than covid and can destroy more lifes but also their greed bring more damage than covid. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Stardust said:

I agree. I am more scared of stupid actions from the government than from covid. Their incompetence and actions without thinking can destroy the country more than covid and can destroy more lifes but also their greed bring more damage than covid. 

By the way the Thais worry more about the incompetence of their government than the foreigners and they not trust any government officials.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, Stardust said:

I agree. I am more scared of stupid actions from the government than from covid. Their incompetence and actions without thinking can destroy the country more than covid and can destroy more lifes but also their greed bring more damage than covid. 

That is undoubtedly the case here. The economic devastation these idiotic circus clown, stageplay soldiers have wreaked is astounding. It will likely be a decade until the full extent of it is known. And we can all hope history will hold them accountable for their crimes, if not the courts in the Hague. 

 

They keep throwing out silly numbers, like economic growth has slowed to 1.5%. Yeah, more like negative 17%. And they won't even discuss homelessness, suicides, and unemployment (likely at 40% nationwide, if you include the cash economy and the sex workers). 

Edited by dmacarelli
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, dmacarelli said:

 

Just proof of vaccination, and a Covid negative test. This is what adults do. 

 

 

There are many residents of this country who think that is far too risky.

 

I am not saying that I share that view,.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, colinneil said:

Yes but the problem here is, the clowns pertaining to be the government here, are just overgrown school boys playing at being adults.

Remember when we were kids most of us liked playing soldiers, well this mob have not grown past that stage.

 

So you are happy for the country to open up now on the basis of letting anyone in based on that criteria ?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Much speculation about the reasons for what is happening to the economy, including the usual claims of incompetence, corruption, etc. But what if it's intentional? i.e. planned demolition of the small and medium-sized business base to usher in a post-pandemic New National Order with cut-price real estate across the country for purchase by the already super rich and eager investors from the Central Kingdom...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 9/10/2021 at 10:06 AM, kayne189 said:

There are too many red tapes and additional costs for many tourists to consider Thailand at the moment. 

For a family of 4, the 8000 Baht PCR tests and travel insurance can cost upwards of 70000 baht to the holiday.

Reduce the no. of required PCR tests and some other requirements and restrictions and they might actually come close to some of the predicted visitor numbers.

Not advocating for myself personally, but a holiday has to be fun.  With the bars closed, mandatory quarantines for many, Sandbox schemes that as far as rising infections are concerned, have failed, why would the 50 mill a year that used to visit even want to come?

I don't say that the TH gov should change all this because it's what I want, but it's clear to me, that they are trying to ride two horses at the same time in trying to revitalise tourism, while not being overly competent at resolving CV, means that the two horses are travelling in different directions. To add to the problem, there is almost certainly an outstanding legacy due from the use of Sinovax. The use of this vax can be compared to a man painting his house with water-based emulsion paint just before the monsoon season, and it clearly will not stand any reasonable test of time.

Since mainly effective vaccines came onstream nine months ago, they have done a good job in terms of numbers vaxxed, but it is becoming ever more apparent that this was "the wrong tool for the job" with Sinovax. For most of those vaxxed, the emulsion paint is streaming down the outside of the house. In my opinion, the fight against CV can only be won by a re-vax of all those who have so far only received Sino. The only good news I can say on that front, is that accessing vax supplies should be a lot easier now as most of those in the developed countries who wanted vaxxes, have already got theirs. Assuming, I am right and they could start today, to reach 80% fully vaxxed with say two jabs of AZ, will take 18 months at 200k jabs a day. 

Meanwhile, some brighter news comes from my analysis of the data gleaned from https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/thailand/ For the best part of five weeks now, recoveries have exceeded new cases by about 2k per day, and active cases have fallen from a peak of 210k to 140k. Also, in the past four weeks, new infections have declined by about 300 a day. That, I would suggest.  is the horse they should continue to ride. You can expect these figures to decelerate, but if the average can be maintained at a decline of 200 new cases daily, then we are about six weeks away from new cases declining back to  pre- Sandbox levels.

That might be the time for those in power to ask what went wrong, and if we want to reopen tourism, can we stop it happening again?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Soidog said:

Yes that’s true that English is the standard language which is used in aviation. Many pilots will use their native language when flying within their own airspace, but that is wrong and following an incident could lead to disciplinary action. Communication between aircraft and air traffic controllers is not just a two way issue. Other aircraft on the same frequency also build up a mental picture of aircraft around them and the actions they are taking. This requires a common international standard which happens to be English. It’s as much a safety issue as anything else. 
 

As an aside, I often see Thai aircraft taking off from regional airports with a tailwind if that’s the quicker and shorter route to their destination. Aircraft should of course always take off and land in to wind. I’m convinced this is done to save the fuel it requires to take off, gain altitude and then do a turn to head off to Bangkok or elsewhere. Bad practice and it will lead to an accident. 
 

Off topic I know!! 

"Aircraft should of course always take off and land in to wind."

It is preferable to take off into the wind as you gain height much faster plus you benefit from the extra lift on the wings hence you can take off at a lower ground speed, but it is not compulsory.

Also there may be no headwind available or no wind at all in which case aircraft including jets can take off with no problem. 

I used to take off in a small four seat aircraft in the same direction week after week when having flying lessons as there was only one runway as did passenger jet aircraft. 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, JamesR said:

"Aircraft should of course always take off and land in to wind."

It is preferable to take off into the wind as you gain height much faster plus you benefit from the extra lift on the wings hence you can take off at a lower ground speed, but it is not compulsory.

Also there may be no headwind available or no wind at all in which case aircraft including jets can take off with no problem. 

I used to take off in a small four seat aircraft in the same direction week after week when having flying lessons as there was only one runway as did passenger jet aircraft. 

There are some situation where tailwind have to be accepted (within limits) but this should not be standard practice or used to save time or fuel. Virtually all runways have two directions to take off and land from, unless there are physical obstructions such as terrain blocking one end. There are other factors such avoiding populations due to noise abatement rules. Although not “illegal” to operate with tailwinds, it is highly undesirable and most pilots avoid it.  
 

The reason you need to avoid take off with a tail wind is that the lift generated by a wing relates to airspeed. With a stationary aircraft and a headwind of 20 knots, you already have an air speed of 20knots. Similarly, landing with a headwind allows you to land with a lower ground speed and hence shorter stopping distance. For small aircraft on a long runway it is less of an issue. However a fully loaded commercial jet with heavy cargo, passengers and fuel at a small regional airport is likely to need as much of the runway as possible in order to gain sufficient airspeed to take off. With a tailwind, the speed of the wind subtracts from your airspeed required to reach VR speed (take off or rotation  speed). For a Boeing 777 this is typically 130-160 knots depending on weight  a small Piper warrior this is around 50-55 knots  

There is also a couple of further important reason why it is more than preferable to avoid taking off with a tail wind. With a tail wind the climb out angle of the aircraft is lower, meaning clearance of obstacles could be an issue.  Should you need to abort takeoff, a headwind will also assist in slowing the aircraft before you run out of runway. When there is no wind, then it obviously doesn’t matter what direction you take off or land. When there is wind, even a few knots, then it is good airmanship to use it to your advantage and safety of any passengers.
 

Another reason why you may land with a tailwind relates to instrument landings. If conditions are such that you have to make an instrument approach and landing, then some airports only have that capability in one direction.  
 

Many commercial pilots will avoid tailwind landings of more than 10 knots. Many even preferring to divert to an alternate airfield if that is the only option.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, Soidog said:

There are some situation where tailwind have to be accepted (within limits) but this should not be standard practice or used to save time or fuel. Virtually all runways have two directions to take off and land from, unless there are physical obstructions such as terrain blocking one end. There are other factors such avoiding populations due to noise abatement rules. Although not “illegal” to operate with tailwinds, it is highly undesirable and most pilots avoid it.  
 

The reason you need to avoid take off with a tail wind is that the lift generated by a wing relates to airspeed. With a stationary aircraft and a headwind of 20 knots, you already have an air speed of 20knots. Similarly, landing with a headwind allows you to land with a lower ground speed and hence shorter stopping distance. For small aircraft on a long runway it is less of an issue. However a fully loaded commercial jet with heavy cargo, passengers and fuel at a small regional airport is likely to need as much of the runway as possible in order to gain sufficient airspeed to take off. With a tailwind, the speed of the wind subtracts from your airspeed required to reach VR speed (take off or rotation  speed). For a Boeing 777 this is typically 130-160 knots depending on weight  a small Piper warrior this is around 50-55 knots  

There is also a couple of further important reason why it is more than preferable to avoid taking off with a tail wind. With a tail wind the climb out angle of the aircraft is lower, meaning clearance of obstacles could be an issue.  Should you need to abort takeoff, a headwind will also assist in slowing the aircraft before you run out of runway. When there is no wind, then it obviously doesn’t matter what direction you take off or land. When there is wind, even a few knots, then it is good airmanship to use it to your advantage and safety of any passengers.
 

Another reason why you may land with a tailwind relates to instrument landings. If conditions are such that you have to make an instrument approach and landing, then some airports only have that capability in one direction.  
 

Many commercial pilots will avoid tailwind landings of more than 10 knots. Many even preferring to divert to an alternate airfield if that is the only option.  

 

1 hour ago, JamesR said:

"Aircraft should of course always take off and land in to wind."

It is preferable to take off into the wind as you gain height much faster plus you benefit from the extra lift on the wings hence you can take off at a lower ground speed, but it is not compulsory.

Also there may be no headwind available or no wind at all in which case aircraft including jets can take off with no problem. 

I used to take off in a small four seat aircraft in the same direction week after week when having flying lessons as there was only one runway as did passenger jet aircraft. 

Prediction for international travellers to Thailand lowered again

Are you trying to say that we'll have more tourists if their planes take off and land in to wind? Is that TAT's latest approach to the crisis? Or do we have a new flying club section? ✈️ 😂

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

40 minutes ago, Bob20 said:

Prediction for international travellers to Thailand lowered again

Are you trying to say that we'll have more tourists if their planes take off and land in to wind? Is that TAT's latest approach to the crisis? Or do we have a new flying club section? ✈️ 😂

Yes @Bob20 TAT have asked that aircraft take off with a tailwind in order to make tourists arrive and leave quicker. They also believe a tailwind will result in any residual virus being dissipated more quickly 😉

A flying club section seems a great idea 👍🏻

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Soidog said:

There are some situation where tailwind have to be accepted (within limits) but this should not be standard practice or used to save time or fuel. Virtually all runways have two directions to take off and land from, unless there are physical obstructions such as terrain blocking one end. There are other factors such avoiding populations due to noise abatement rules. Although not “illegal” to operate with tailwinds, it is highly undesirable and most pilots avoid it.  
 

The reason you need to avoid take off with a tail wind is that the lift generated by a wing relates to airspeed. With a stationary aircraft and a headwind of 20 knots, you already have an air speed of 20knots. Similarly, landing with a headwind allows you to land with a lower ground speed and hence shorter stopping distance. For small aircraft on a long runway it is less of an issue. However a fully loaded commercial jet with heavy cargo, passengers and fuel at a small regional airport is likely to need as much of the runway as possible in order to gain sufficient airspeed to take off. With a tailwind, the speed of the wind subtracts from your airspeed required to reach VR speed (take off or rotation  speed). For a Boeing 777 this is typically 130-160 knots depending on weight  a small Piper warrior this is around 50-55 knots  

There is also a couple of further important reason why it is more than preferable to avoid taking off with a tail wind. With a tail wind the climb out angle of the aircraft is lower, meaning clearance of obstacles could be an issue.  Should you need to abort takeoff, a headwind will also assist in slowing the aircraft before you run out of runway. When there is no wind, then it obviously doesn’t matter what direction you take off or land. When there is wind, even a few knots, then it is good airmanship to use it to your advantage and safety of any passengers.
 

Another reason why you may land with a tailwind relates to instrument landings. If conditions are such that you have to make an instrument approach and landing, then some airports only have that capability in one direction.  
 

Many commercial pilots will avoid tailwind landings of more than 10 knots. Many even preferring to divert to an alternate airfield if that is the only option.  

My initial reply was about headwind and this has now gone onto tailwinds.

Let's not get started on various angles of crosswinds and their affects otherwise we might have to end up writing a book on the subject. 🤣

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, JamesR said:

My initial reply was about headwind and this has now gone onto tailwinds.

Let's not get started on various angles of crosswinds and their affects otherwise we might have to end up writing a book on the subject. 🤣

😂😂😂. If you do I’ll have to get my Wizzywheel out and that’s not a pleasant site 😂😂

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share


×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By posting on Thaiger Talk you agree to the Terms of Use