USM Cancelled
Is this purely because the 737's are due to be put down, and they have no suitable craft? :confused:
Surely they were making a killing on these flights? Please be advised that THAI will suspend services to Samui International Airport (USM) from 03SEP18 onwards, until further notice. The following affected THAI operated flights are:
|
If they were very keen on keeping the route alive, it should be fairly easy to get newer 737's or A319s between now and 2nd of September. Might need a wet lease period, but the route could easily be kept open.
I doubt it is a real bread winner though, so much connecting traffic, and only two flights a day compared to what seems endless number of flights on PG |
Who knows. You can't assume logical decision making with TG.
Though PG's stranglehold on USM (they literally own the airport) may be the main explanation. |
Originally Posted by Kacee
(Post 29744601)
Who knows. You can't assume logical decision making with TG.
Though PG's stranglehold on USM (they literally own the airport) may be the main explanation. |
we will probably soon know more as it comes as a surprise
|
Originally Posted by CPH-Flyer
(Post 29744625)
It may very well be driven by PG, they already played games with the runway classification to keep A320s away from operating to USM. Keeping Thai Smile out.
|
Originally Posted by Sam Bee
(Post 29749839)
But PG operate several A320s to Samui everyday :confused:
I did a bit of searching around before work. As late as 2015 A320 was not allowed at USM. Can't say on a quick search if that has been rescinded. On a side note search, airliners.net does not have a single image of an A320 at USM, though they do have 48 A319 images. |
Originally Posted by Sam Bee
(Post 29749839)
But PG operate several A320s to Samui everyday :confused:
they have up to 20 daily flights, the big majority on A319, some on ATR |
Originally Posted by Sam Bee
(Post 29749839)
But PG operate several A320s to Samui everyday :confused:
320 requires 6900 foot runway. USM runway is listed as 6890 feet. Coincidence? |
Originally Posted by Kacee
(Post 29750921)
I've never seen one. PG and MI both operate 319s.
320 requires 6900 foot runway. USM runway is listed as 6890 feet. Coincidence? |
You all appear to be correct - I was under the impression they used the A320's for the HKG & SIN routes, but checking forward that's not the case. I don't keep records of what i'd flown out of USM (apart from ensure I caught a 717 just before they got shelved!) but you're all right looking forward.
In which case I have to question the belief that I had that PG had given TG two daily rotations under the threat TG made to open another airport on USM. Like the long heralded airport in Koh Phangan, i'll just read that as pie in the sky! The BKK-USM flights on TG always hovered around THB5000 o/w - and loads were seemingly great, but maybe the costs of maintaining their last 737-400 stop this being practical. Mind you Wellington has a 6,827 ft length runway and takes several A320's daily (that i've checked!). All very odd. |
Originally Posted by Sam Bee
(Post 29751103)
.
Mind you Wellington has a 6,827 ft length runway and takes several A320's daily (that i've checked!). All very odd. In USM's case where the owner and operator of the airport, Bangkok Airways have limited interest in that, it is not like to be granted a dispensation. Even applied for is unlikely |
Originally Posted by CPH-Flyer
(Post 29751147)
Dispensations from restrictions are often granted, e.g. the former Ishigaki Airport in Japan operated jet flights on dispensation for 20+ years. Only had dimensions for turbo prop operations.
In USM's case where the owner and operator of the airport, Bangkok Airways have limited interest in that, it is not like to be granted a dispensation. Even applied for is unlikely Fortunately I found multiple videos of Bangkok Airways flying A320's into USM, but all from a couple of years ago, so i'm not going mad, they've obviously made changes to impact Thai. Also, TG do not own any A320's anymore do they? All transferred to Thai Smile (WE) are they not? I don't understand the AOC/legal split of TG/WE and if a couple of A320's could be transferred back as obviously they wouldn't want to operate the route under the Thai Smile brand. Not at THB5000 for a 50 minute flight anyway? All fun and games :) |
Originally Posted by Sam Bee
(Post 29751195)
Ah, thanks, it's all making sense, i'm applying non-Thai way of thinking.
Fortunately I found multiple videos of Bangkok Airways flying A320's into USM, but all from a couple of years ago, so i'm not going mad, they've obviously made changes to impact Thai. Also, TG do not own any A320's anymore do they? All transferred to Thai Smile (WE) are they not? I don't understand the AOC/legal split of TG/WE and if a couple of A320's could be transferred back as obviously they wouldn't want to operate the route under the Thai Smile brand. Not at THB5000 for a 50 minute flight anyway? All fun and games :) I started to wonder if the threat of cancelling USM is a ploy to try to get the government to step in and force PG's hands in opening the airport more. It is not the first time TG has threatened to pull out of USM. |
Unfortunate, indeed. Not a big fan of 737s, to be honest, but have taken TG service into USM a couple of times. I don't live in Thailand, not to mention Asia. Coming in from either India (where I have family) or US, flying TG is just much easier because of the connections where I have to take TG into BKK.
Hopefully, TG will be able to fly back to USM at some point - really enjoy vacationing in the area. |
All times are GMT -6. The time now is 4:32 pm. |
This site is owned, operated, and maintained by MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Designated trademarks are the property of their respective owners.