Bearing in mind how oblivious the Thais are to their surroundings and how badly they drive, seeing their antics in the air should be fun. Incidentally, what is a "flight experience"? Bizarre bastardisation of the English language.
Editor: Ah, yet another expat who takes pleasure in criticising Thailand but can't bear to leave. If only it was just like . . .where are you from, Rob?

Posted by Rob C on January 10, 2009 16:38

Where I come from is irrelevant and who said I live in Thailand. First rule of journalism: don't make assumptions. Wanting safer roads is not too much to ask for, so don't level the charge of typical expat crtic at me. Appalling driving standards should always be criticised, or do you find the driving here somewhat strangely endearing and a perverse charm in high RTA statistics? You strike me as the worst sort of expat, the type who wants to keep the Thais down a little, to keep the country in the Third-World league, to not let it improve too much, to treat teh Thais as children, almost.

Editor: If you don't live here, your comments are irrelevant. Your views are, as usual, full of sweeping generalisations and bigotry. Get lost, Rob.

Posted by Rob C on January 11, 2009 11:37

Rob might well be highlighting an important point - air safety in Thailand. It would be good to see some Thai statistics on this, especially for these smaller planes which do not do well in windy conditions. The lack of safety of a number of Thailand's airlines is well known.
And road safety and poor driving standards is certainly a chronic issue that could have some correlation with flying standards.
Editor: Perhaps you can explain the correlation between driving standards and flying standards. The answer: there is none. That's why Rob's comment is yet another idle slur. And where is the evidence for your comments?

Posted by James on January 12, 2009 12:35

The correlation would be in lax enforcement of safety standards:
The continuing farce of One-Two-Go...
The successive mob takeovers of Phuket and Bangkok airport...
These are clear signs of official incompetence and negligence in air safety.
Editor: I don't think there's a link between road safety and air safety in any country. What happens at airports has no relationship to what happens in the air. The final report on One-Two-Go has yet to be released, so the official cause is not known. But the crash has been blamed on the Indonesian-trained pilot. That's no indication of 'official incompetence and negligence.' You are entitled to your view, but there are no facts to support your theories.

Posted by James on January 13, 2009 10:50

A cursory search of the internet shows there are extremely worrying signs of negligence by airlines, airports and the authorities in Thailand.
This includes allegations from pilots of One-Two-Go as well as articles in many international publications.
You might also check out the website "Investigate Udom".
They have a link to documents aired on Australian TV that indicate serious air safety issues.
Editor: All of that is accusation and supposition for now, just like the original comment connecting road safety to air safety. There are still two sides to that debate, and a lot of court time to come.

Posted by James on January 13, 2009 11:53

For me the roads are less of a direct issue than the skies.
I expect every road to be dangerous but cannot say the same for airlines/airports in a relatively modern country like Thailand.
The fact remains that two of country's international airports were taken over by mobs last year.
Surely this says a lot about the security and safety of aviation in Thailand?
Editor: Security of airports, yes. Safety of aircraft, no. It was bizarre even before the blockade to be able to walk into the country's biggest airport without a check on what you were carrying. Phuket, meanwhile, had checks but the same kind of security from invasion. All that shouldn't impact on air safety standards.

Posted by James on January 13, 2009 12:42

Well it makes it a bit hard for the planes to land if the airport has been taken over by the happy clappers. . .

Posted by James on January 13, 2009 14:10

An editor really shouldn't take things so personally, nor should he or she belittle a contributor or tell them that his comments are irrelevant (I do not live in Gaza or Israel but can still comment on the situation there in the press concerned with that area or in the wider world) and then say to another reader that 'you are entitled to your view.' We know we are entitled to our views! James made some valid points - and you should be glad that people are taking the trouble to read and comment on what seems to be little more than a blog of your own world (or rather just a tunnel vision one of Phuket) view.
Editor: It's good to see you writing sensibly and sensitively rather than making inane cracks or race-based put-downs. Wasn't it you who said the rohingya boat people should be put out to sea? I only take things personally when correspondents make personal cracks. If you've seen the light Rob, that's great. But that doesn't make your original message, inferring that because Thais drive badly they probably also fly badly, any more logical. My outlook is liberal enough to embrace all kinds of other views. But provocateurs can find air elsewhere.

Posted by Rob C on January 13, 2009 16:40