CheshireTom

I didn't forget anything - I was replying to your comparison of aircraft types, not engine types. Remember ... Smart move on Boeing's part and let's remember the 787 is still in the 'test' phase where problems are expected unlike the A380 that's in commercial service where a catastrophic engine failure is unacceptable. If you want to compare the engine failures of RR v GE v PW, no problem on my part.

I would agree - if you are on their 777 or 380 aircraft. Economy class on their 747s isn't so great.

The 747 isn't in the test phase. "A QANTAS plane carrying 212 passengers made an emergency landing yesterday after an engine exploded shortly after it took off from San Francisco. The same jet has previously been investigated for a faulty engine, according to the Australian Transport Safety Bureau, the Herald Sun reports. The four-engine Boeing 747, which departed from San Francisco International Airport for Sydney at about 11.10pm local time on Monday (4pm Tuesday AEST), was in the air for 45 minutes and at 30,000ft when there was an explosion in the No. 4 engine". Just like the other aircraft that suffered uncontained engine failure of their GE engines. As were the pax on the 747. The bottom line is that uncontained engine failures aren't uncommon, nor are they unique to RR engines and/or A380s.

That would put them in line with GE. Jet engine failures overseas prompt 'urgent' NTSB recommendation here May 27, 2010|By Mike M. Ahlers, CNN The failure of General Electric engines on four jet aircraft overseas during the past two years has prompted the National Transportation Safety Board to issue an "urgent" recommendation to increase inspections of the engines on U.S. aircraft. None of the incidents resulted in crashes, injuries or fatalities. But in all four cases, engine parts penetrated the engine housing. Such "uncontained engine failures" are particularly dangerous because flying engine parts could puncture fuel or hydraulic lines, damage flight surfaces or even penetrate the fuselage and injure passengers.

Good one ...

Showing a poor judgement in the choice of motor vehicles seems to be a common trait around your way. BSA, Yugo, Pontiac Vibe ..... Maybe you could start a thread ... "GE Kicks Euro Butt" or something along those lines. Anyway, kudos to the flight crew of the Dreamliner in averting what could have been much more serious incident than it eventually turned out.

Quite a few folk with huskies down my way ...

Oops ... The BigD "Kiss of Death" strikes again ... Boeing Dreamliner makes emergency landing during test flight By the CNN Wire Staff November 10, 2010 -- Updated 0315 GMT (1115 HKT) (CNN) -- A new Boeing 787 Dreamliner made an emergency landing in south Texas during a test flight Tuesday afternoon after the pilot reported smoke in the cabin, the Federal Aviation Administration said. The jetliner landed at Laredo International Airport at 2:54 p.m. after the flight crew reported smoke in the cabin at the back of the twin-engine aircraft, FAA spokesman Lynn Lunsford said. Those aboard evacuated using the plane's slides, Lunsford said. Boeing spokeswoman Lori Gunter said the crew "safely evacuated the airplane," which was met by emergency crews on the runway. "We are continuing to gather data regarding this event," Gunter told CNN in a written statement. "It's too early" to tell what may have gone wrong," she added. Electrical fire forces emergency landing of 787 test plane By Dominic Gates Seattle Times aerospace reporter A serious in-flight fire in the electrical-equipment bay of a Boeing 787 Dreamliner flight-test plane forced an emergency landing Tuesday in Laredo, Texas. All 30 to 40 people aboard were safely evacuated on slides. The fire affected the cockpit controls and the jet lost its primary flight displays and its auto-throttle, according to a person familiar with the incident. The pilot lost some use of the flight and engine controls, which on the Dreamliner are electrically activated, the source said. The smoke in the back of the cabin of Dreamliner No. 2, where a team of technicians sat at computer workstations monitoring the flight data, was first detected on approach to the Laredo airport after six hours of flying.

.... leads directly into their building ... from a skytrain station.

Fine, if you're booking direct with an airline. However, if you're using a travel agent they're likely to have a different opinion.

Or maybe to the Thais, they mean something other than what some farangs think they should mean. There are several in BKK on Asoke between Petchaburi and Sukhumvit (one outside the eye hospital) that work pretty well - i.e. traffic gives way to pedestrians. If there aren't any pedestrians on the crossing, there's not really anything to give way to, so why hang around for no reason at all? There's actually a crossing (with no lights at all) on Sukhumvit, between Soi 33 and Emporium on the opposite side, that drivers seem to observe for some reason. The only downside is that the initial act of stepping out onto the crossing is like the Thai equivalent of bungee jumping.

I'm confused. Taxis doing a drop-off aren't "waiting taxis". They have a couple of "Enforcer" SUVs with great big klaxons attached purely to ensure that taxis don't hang about the departures area. Why don't you just go to the public taxi stands and "make an offer" to the waiting drivers for the trip to Pattaya? I didn't. Or if I did, I'd appreciate if you'd highlight the relevant comment. I was confused by your description of simply walking outside to the waiting taxis when, as it now appears, you meant go up one level to departures and bargain with a taxi driver doing a drop-off. Of course, 99% of the taxis are Bangkok based, so it's going to be pretty difficult, if not impossible, to identify which one is trying to fit in several return trips to Pattaya.

Cathay one stop via HKG, Singapore one stop via Singapore or Emirates one stop via Dubai. He can purchase an Emirates through ticket in Oz to fly Sydney-Bangkok-Dubai-New York with a stopover in Bangkok.

I don't follow you. The "waiting taxis" are down one level (or two levels depending on how you count them) and could have been at the airport for hours before they even manage to get to the passenger load zone. Once there, the despatch of those taxis is controlled by AOT staff through two pick-up zones, each with half a dozen desks and a couple of despatch guys in each zone. Are you suggesting that you simply ignore the AOT staff and approach the drivers directly, thereby denying AOT out of their 50 Baht fee, and that taxi drivers are queuing up to do likewise? Why book with Mr T or Mr Toom then? Anyway, I would suggest that is seriously bad advice to follow at the public taxi pick-up zones at Suvarnabhumi - you could end up generating an awful lot of unnecessary grief for yourself.. Are you saying that it's a smart taxi-driver that simply jumps in front of the hundreds of other taxis waiting in line? Don't you think that the other taxi drivers might have something to say about that? It obviously works differently up on the departures level where you can piss about for ages before you find a cab that will go to Pattaya, let alone at whatever rate you have in mind.

That's why I wrote "advertised cost", rather than just "cost". I'm not really interested in what someone actually pays, only if, and how, they circumnavigate the controls that are in place. It would be good info for newbies. Any ideas?

No-one suggested they weren't an accurate quote, or taken out of context. If I had, you would have been able to use the Quote function to demonstrate that I had. I only congratulated you on finally, after all those years, mastering the ability to slice and dice.

The "waiting taxis" are now parked in two zones, each controlled and serviced by a number of staff manning half a dozen ticket counters in each zone. Those staff match passengers to drivers. The advertised cost to Pattaya is currently 1.5k Baht + tolls + 50 Baht airport fee (think of it as the taxi equivalent of a barfine). How do you circumnavigate those controls - in particular, the 50 Baht fee?

Sheesh! Who's a clever boy then? Slicing and dicing quotes now. Well done!

It's a trait a lot of them have - someone's got to be blamed. Doesn't matter what it is - man-made or natural. Rolls will sort out the issue, whatever it is, and the mishap will be referred to as a "successful failure". You've got to wonder how much they'd be celebrating if the Aussie Capt hadn't managed to return the aircraft to Singapore successfully though. "A complete disintegration of a CF6-6 fan assembly ..." "Four uncontained failures of CF6-45/50 engines ..." "The CF6-80 series ... following a series of high-pressure turbine failures ..." "In another embarrassing maintenance blunder involving the aviation industry, General Electric Co. disclosed it is working with carriers and U.S. regulators to resolve questions about improperly certified parts in dozens of its jet engines ..." I remember BigD insisting this thread was about Boeing v Airbus and wasn't a thinly disguised attempt at nation bashing ...

It's only 6 months since the UK election, not 5 years. Or were you referring to the 2005 General Election?

Your claim was that the extent of the UK's financial troubles has only been realised since the election. During that 6 month period, the GBP has risen significantly in value against the USD and maintained its position against the Euro. That means the GBP has proved to be stronger than the USD, as good as the EUR but less so than the THB. That points to the relative strength of the THB, rather than the significance of further UK financial troubles being uncovered during the 6 month period.

No. The USD has fallen over 10% against the THB over the same 6 month period since the UK election which means the GBP has risen significantly against the USD.

Compared to an 11% drop in the previous 6 months.

... and 48.80 at the date of the election, compared to 47.80 now - so what's been found out?