China Air, EVA Air, Cathay Pacific and Thai

[lookingtoswing4 0]

Thai Airways have decided to continue non-stop BKK-LAX until 31.1.09 using A345. Thai have been unable to sell/lease their fleet of 4 x A345 so rumour has it some will be changed to other routes (Milan) etc

 

Damit....They changed my schedule AGAIN because they switched the LAX-BKK route back to the A-345!!! Not that I mind a more direct option on a more favorable schedule, but I just got everything changed including my hotel and airport pick-up. Not going to change my domestic connection, tho, or I will incur another $150 change fee. The best I can hope for is that Thai Air will put me on the 12/28 flight as I can easily make that with my revised domestic connection, but will need to come back a day earlier to catch my domestic return after an overnight @ LAX. Given their track record, I am nervous to change as they might make another adjustment before I leave. I have NEVER had this problem with Thai Air before, but am now a bit upset at their business practices. Maybe it is a tactic to get me to cancel so they could then charge another passenger almost $500 more than I paid for my ticket a few months ago?

[Samsonite 181]

Non-stop have ceased, but there is no change of planes on the new route. They sold their A-340's and replaced the route with 777. As a result, they need a refuel stop in Osaka, both directions. This was a recent change and required me to make major changes to my upcoming NYE trip to Pattaya. All worked-out well except that Nova Platinum has yet to re-confirm my reservation change request.

Which version of the Boeing 777 are they using? If they were to use the 777-200LR they could fly farther, carry more passengers and use less fuel than they can with their Airbus 340-500s. To get that kind of range out of the A340-500 they have to reduce the number of seats, and therefore, passengers, to get the weight down.

[lookingtoswing4 0]

Which version of the Boeing 777 are they using? If they were to use the 777-200LR they could fly farther, carry more passengers and use less fuel than they can with their Airbus 340-500s. To get that kind of range out of the A340-500 they have to reduce the number of seats, and therefore, passengers, to get the weight down.

 

Read my last post. They already switched back to the A-345. I confirmed the booking change, but Thai Airways has yet to contact me about it. Good thing as I am weighing my options because I have domestic arrangements I already had to change when they switched AC/schedule the first time. That change cost me $100 and I just don't want to do that again if I can re-arrange my time and accomodations. I believe I can make it work if they will allow me to go a day earlier (12/27) and return a day earlier (1/3). So far, those flights have availability. I am pretty sure they will work with me since they made the change and because this is the second schedule and equipment change in less than 2 months.

 

But I was scheduled on a 772/3-ER as the replacement aircraft.

[Samsonite 181]

...But I was scheduled on a 772/3-ER as the replacement aircraft.

Those are two different airplanes, so do you mean the -300ER for the

longer leg of the journey and the -200 for the shorter flight from NRT (or wherever) to BKK?

[lookingtoswing4 0]

Those are two different airplanes, so do you mean the -300ER for the

longer leg of the journey and the -200 for the shorter flight from NRT (or wherever) to BKK?

 

Not 100% certain as they only listed it as 7772/3-ER. Slightly different seat configuration between the two versions, according to SeatGuru, but not drastically different. I am only certain that it was the ER version and that they had a technical stop figured in for fuel, in Osaka (no change of planes or off-loading of passengers). Forced me to book a seat in the area where the seat configuration was identical to be sure I was getting what I wanted.

[Samsonite 181]

Not 100% certain as they only listed it as 7772/3-ER. Slightly different seat configuration between the two versions, according to SeatGuru, but not drastically different. I am only certain that it was the ER version and that they had a technical stop figured in for fuel, in Osaka (no change of planes or off-loading of passengers). Forced me to book a seat in the area where the seat configuration was identical to be sure I was getting what I wanted.

Interesting.

Actually "7772/3-ER" could cover about 5 different models. There is the -200, -200ER, -200LR, -300, and -300ER. Guess, I could thrown in a sixth, the -200LRF (cargo version). :)

All the -200 versions share the same fuselage. The two -300 versions have a longer fuselage, and seat about 60-65 more passengers than the -200 versions, but the -200LR and -300ER (both more recent models) share the same wings, landing gear, and engines. Range is 5,235 nautical miles for the -200, 7,700 nm for the -200ER, 9,400 nm for the -200LR, 6,015 nm for the -300, and 7,930 nm for the -300ER.

More than you wanted to know, I'm sure.

Edited October 21, 2008 by Scalawag