Rodrigo

Update. I stayed there again this month. Complete change in outlook. It may have been that the owner had come around and revamped the place. I got very good service. True there are a couple of front desk guys who are not very friendly or accommodating.

I went to MBK and asked around. If you get out of Tokyo on the 4th floor and first shop in front of you. There is a lady wearing a scarf and they have many commendations written in different languages. It is straight out and is on the right side if you walk straight out into the shops on 4th floor. I bought it from there.

Does anyone know where I can buy a oneplus 3 in Thailand? I mean a shop and not online.

It's as good as the rest. The main difference is the price. Maybe the camera in the Samsung and iPhone maybe slightly better but not significantly. It's very fast and does not freeze or give any trouble. I had the one plus one before. The one plus two was not good. But the 3 is brilliant. For 15000 baht u will never get a better phone. For 20 k also u will never get a better phone.

Update. I bought the phone in Bkk and very happy with it. Paid 15,200 for it.

Yes the phone oneplus 3

Thanks OTS. The ground floor was flooded today due to an underground pipe burst. The whole restaurant was flooded too

When Aspen is asking 2500 for a night then Majestic Grande can ask that high. Its the Arabs that are driving the prices high.

Aspen has gone downhill rapidly. I used to love this hotel for the price and quiteness but the standard and the people who stay there is making me look at other hotels. Too many arab families. Any suggestions on other hotels with that kind of price range and comfort?

I think it also depends if you officially check her into the hotel. I found that if you do that then hotels treat them as normal guests. The problem starts when you invite them to the room but not check them into the hotel.

Korean is not so good in business class. I flew recently and flying in two weeks time. The food is not so good and though it's flat bed a lot of aircraft still have it slightly at an angle hence you keep sliding down sometimes. Also the entertainment is crap.

Thailand has probably already signed a mou with EASA to bring the standards to EASA standards. It is going to take a bit of time but the process has started.

Well if they have VOR/DME approach then its an instrument runway. I checked with Thai Civil Aviation and the story as its printed in the papers are not true they said. Many airports have regular flights into rural airports. Since they are licenced it should not be an issue.

Thailand Civil Aviation Authority has been downgraded to Cat2 by the FAA. Thailand is utterly stupid to even get the FAA to come and do an audit. No Thai carriers fly to USA and hence there is no need for Thailand to accept an FAA audit. Now if EASA the European Aviation Safety Agency does it, it could be huge problems for the Thai airlines internationally.

More information on that. The report in the quoted paper here is not correct. It was a small rural airport with no instrument landing. Hence is was a visual approach. I'm presuming that there is no approach control here as well. All these buildings would be not visual if there is so much smoke. The fact was that he was aligned to the runway and on his approach when he saw the building and pulled up. It says more about Thai Civil Aviation Authority than Nok Air in this case.

Has anyone stayed at the Lohas Suites 75, Soi 2?

In MBK you can find it too. Past all the shops towards the Tokyo shop you will find all kinds of software

I used VPN and it was good for its purpose.

Not actually correct in that FAA and EASA can penalise any country though ICAO has not. Correct in this case that ICAO had significant safety concerns about Thailand. FAA can ban any airline or aircraft registered in a particular country to the area administered by FAA though ICAO may find nothing wrong The same for EASA. The requirements of FAA and EASA are more stringent than that of ICAO

P&G. There is huge rivalry between these two agencies. Both are trying to get countries to follow their system. To be frank this has created huge issues as ICAO is the international regulator but allows national agencies to be stricter than ICAO requirement.EASA is a lot more stringent than FAA and ICAO That said it was the incompetence of Thai DCA that brought this. What I was highlighting was in typical Thai style they made a bad situation worse. They knew that the Civil Aviation department cannot be running airports and then still be giving them airport operator licences but they did nothing about it. Lack of English was the other major issues they need an ICAO approved language for all documentations.

Thanks Youngone. I am limited to mostly the gulf carriers as and as you say its a bit easier to change if you buy direct from the airlines or use a reputable travel agent.

Yes they found significant safety concern in the way Thailand has given air operators certification to some thai airlines. ICAO gave Thailand enough notice to rectify it but in typical thai fashion they messed it up. Then to make matters worse they invited the FAA for an audit thinking it will have a better outcome. But it was worse. Now they got help from EASA and got a better result. In fact Thailand has only two major issues. One was on dangerous goods and the other was giving this air operators certification to some airlines. If they had suspended these licenses then the major concern would have been removed. Now due to the action by FAA Thailand has decided to go for the EASA certification system. Actually there is huge commercial rivaly between FAA and EASA. But EASA is winning due to Europe and of course the former British colonies. If FAA had not done this I think Thailand would have gone for FAA certification.

The main or the largest regulatory national organisations are EASA and FAA. But they can only audit if any foreign Airline flies into their territory. Otherwise they have absolutely no chance or authority of doing an audit. Thailand was absolutely stupid and typical of Thai government that they had no idea that Thai Airways was going to stop their operations to USA. Then they do not need to get the FAA or allow the FAA to do an audit of their civil aviation department. ICAO is the only one who cannot be refused. ICAO had significant safety concerns about Thai civil aviation department because they did not follow their own procedures. Now, any audit done by any international or national aviation agency on an airline is strictly confidential. There is no way a magazine or an onepoll has that access. The safety of any airline is not calculated by how many delays or breakdown an airline has but only by an internal audit by a regulatory authority. So that's why these newspaper or magazine reports should not be accepted as facts.

Yes the airlines rating actually has no real bearing on it. It's just a newspaper poll who frankly do not know what they are talking about.

The EASA audit has already been completed. Thai Airways who fly to Europe has no issues and can fly to Europe. The cutting back is a commercial reason and has nothing to do with Safety. Like a lot of state owned enterprises Thai Airways has been a disaster commercially for sometime now. They have a new guy at the newly formed civil aviation authority but as usual he will be replaced soon by an Air Force General who has no clue about civil aviation.