There’s some exciting news for Thailand, and it presents some new opportunities for airlines from the country.
In this post:
FAA upgrades Thailand from Category 2 to Category 1
In 2015, the United States Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) downgraded Thailand’s aviation safety rating from Category 1 to Category 2. This came after FAA inspectors conducted a review of the Civil Aviation Authority of Thailand (CAAT), and identified several areas of non-compliance with minimum safety standards.
To be clear, this didn’t mean that the FAA deemed Thai airlines to be unsafe, but rather just meant that the country wasn’t properly overseeing air carriers in accordance with minimum international safety standards. This had significant implications (which I’ll get into below), but there’s now a positive update. After a decade, Thailand has just been upgraded to a Category 1 rating.
For those wondering why the FAA even has any authority in this regard, it’s because the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) has published standards that airlines have to meet, and this is evaluated under the International Aviation Safety Assessment (IASA) program.
Using these international standards, the FAA assesses the civil aviation authorities of all countries with air carriers that have applied to fly to the United States, or that participate in codeshare agreements with airlines from the United States.
What are the implications of this update?
With Thailand once again having a Category 1 rating from the FAA, air carriers from Thailand can launch service to the United States, and can take part in reciprocal codeshare agreements with airlines from the United States, which hasn’t otherwise been possible in the past decade.
The most exciting implication here is that airlines from Thailand can now launch nonstop service to the United States. The last time we saw nonstop service between the two countries was back in 2015, when Thai Airways used to fly from Bangkok (BKK) to both Los Angeles (LAX) and New York (JFK) using Airbus A340-500s.
These ultra long haul flights ended up being canceled because they lost money (before Thailand’s rating was downgraded), and we haven’t seen any nonstop flights between the two countries since then.
There has been lots of talk of Thai Airways possibly resuming flights to the United States once the Category 1 rating is earned, so will we now see that happen? It’s anyone’s guess how this plays out. Practically speaking:
- The Boeing 787-9 has much better economics than the Airbus A340-500 (which used to fly to the US), and flights between Bangkok and the West Coast should be within range
- That being said, Thai Airways currently has an aircraft shortage, though the airline has 45 Boeing 787-9s on order, which are expected to be delivered as of 2027
- While I think it would logically make sense to wait until then to launch the service, I could also see the excitement of this development causing the government to request these flights be launched sooner
Honestly, maybe this isn’t the worst time for Thai Airways to launch these flights, given that the most recent season of The White Lotus took place in Thailand, so the interest is certainly there…
We’ve certainly seen airlines in North America capitalize on increased demand for Thailand. Air Canada operates a seasonal route to Bangkok out of Vancouver (YVR), while United will be launching a flight to Bangkok out of Hong Kong (HKG).
Bottom line
Roughly a decade after being downgraded, Thailand has regained its Category 1 status with the FAA. This means that airlines from Thailand can launch service to the United States, and also codeshare with US airlines.
It has been a decade since we’ve seen regularly scheduled nonstop flights between the two countries. Thai Airways has expressed interesting in operating these flights, so only time will tell how this develops.
What do you make of Thailand regaining Category 1 status with the FAA, and do you think we’ll see new flights launched?
The last nonstop was May 2012, LAX-BKK on TG.
BKK-JFK-BKK was ended summer 2008.
The 2015 termination was a 1stop service by TG to LAX with a 777.
It will be interesting to see what United does with their HKG-BKK route. I suspect that whole plan was just a preemptive move in anticipation of cat 1 certification to secure the slots before competitors did, and will now change up their plans to instead offer SFO-BKK direct, and perhaps also LAX-BKK, with a codeshare with Thai.
Between the two routes I think BKK-SFO is more likely, it's a bigger United hub with more...
It will be interesting to see what United does with their HKG-BKK route. I suspect that whole plan was just a preemptive move in anticipation of cat 1 certification to secure the slots before competitors did, and will now change up their plans to instead offer SFO-BKK direct, and perhaps also LAX-BKK, with a codeshare with Thai.
Between the two routes I think BKK-SFO is more likely, it's a bigger United hub with more feed traffic, and about an hour shorter flight time which greatly improves the economics of these long routes. LA does have a sizable Thai community, but the reality is the vast majority on this flight would be tourists, so I think SFO would be the better route. Still, I hope they launch both.
Time to "visualise yourself flying A350s or 777-300ERs or 787-9s or something of that kind! ;)" onboard TG 777-200s.
One has to wonder if United knew that this was coming which means that they could and will probably codeshare with TG to enable domestic connections in Thailand and US as well.
TG has massively increased code-sharing on TK's US flights when they started IST. This and the 787 fleet incoming in a few years will shape which US routes they choose to fly on their own metal. TG sees itself as premium, still giving you 2 checked bags in economy when everyone's downgraded to 1 bag. So ULH suits them but it's a matter of will they bring out a 787 config that's 2/3 business class......
TG has massively increased code-sharing on TK's US flights when they started IST. This and the 787 fleet incoming in a few years will shape which US routes they choose to fly on their own metal. TG sees itself as premium, still giving you 2 checked bags in economy when everyone's downgraded to 1 bag. So ULH suits them but it's a matter of will they bring out a 787 config that's 2/3 business class... :)
Back in the 2000s TG and SQ strategies were in lockstep, they both launched the same kind of subsidiaries and both got the A340-500 for the same ULH routes. Now the times are different and TG is set to become a 787-centric airline like AC or NH.
Come onnn, Bangkok-SFO & Bangkok-LAX! JFK/EWR can wait
FAA bully propaganda.
If they're doing on ICAO behalf, then the ban should be effective worldwide not just routes to USA.
Even regulators like EASA CASA CAAC would have banned Thailand too, they haven't.
With MAGA as the agenda, FAA can potentially weaponize IASA audit to block competition.
You looking to dethrone Sean M as the king of acronyms? Now that guy lives and breathes acronyms...
"Now that guy lives and breathes acronyms..."
And why shouldn't he? He's one of the few VERIFIED exec-level professionals in the industry who chats here, or in any of the common blogs/boards.
It's not like dude is getting paid to drop any insight here, so if he wants to do it quickly and with acronyms, I'd be happy to just learn (and Google their meaning if you must) instead of implicitly whine about it. But that's just me.
@Eskimo
And yet Thailand was downgraded during Obama’s last term and now is being upgraded under Trump. I don’t see Trump’s FAA downgrading any country as a weapon yet….. you sound delusional. I guess you only view the powers of executive branch as legitimate when your “team” wins. It’s gonna be a long 45 months for you if you don’t chill out!
3.2.1…..
I'm not saying the downgrade or upgrade in Thailand's status was political, nor was Eskimo saying Trump had done it. He specifically said "FAA can potentially weaponize IASA", and he's right.
After all, this is the same admin that blocked access to government buildings for law firms who represented their political opponents in court, the same admin that's trying to cut off university funding over curriculums and admissions, the same admin that's been witholding...
I'm not saying the downgrade or upgrade in Thailand's status was political, nor was Eskimo saying Trump had done it. He specifically said "FAA can potentially weaponize IASA", and he's right.
After all, this is the same admin that blocked access to government buildings for law firms who represented their political opponents in court, the same admin that's trying to cut off university funding over curriculums and admissions, the same admin that's been witholding Congressionally allocated funding to agencies, states, and contractors over because it doesn't like the projects those funds are for, the same admin that witheld Congressionally allocated aid for Ukraine in 2019 to get dirt on their own political opponent. There is no low MAGA won't stoop to, they just haven't found a reason or need to weaponize the FAA yet.
Partisan banter aside, it should be noted that Thailand also sought an FAA upgrade...
Partisan banter aside, it should be noted that Thailand also sought an FAA upgrade in 2018 (Trump) and 2021 (Biden), and was rebuffed both times then, as well.
Yes, IASA is an internationally imposed assessment, under ICAO guidelines; but it's worth noting that the USA is about the only significant aviation market who found reason downgrade Thailand as such.
The British, French, Emiratis, Chinese, Australians, Taiwanese, Germans, Koreans, Ethiopians, Qataris, Canadians, etc, didn't.
Even the notoriously risk-averse Japanese, had no problem with Thai aviation oversight.
Really does make one wonder why the US saw fit to do so for 10yrs, when no one else did..................
Actually the FAA was not the only regulator to impose restrictions on new routes due to safety concerns. In 2015 South Korea, Japan and China also took the same actions against Thailand upon a “red flag” warning from ICAO citing 33 significant safety concerns months BEFORE the FAA
Not even sure how United’s flight from Hong Kong is of any relevance.
Fingers crossed that Thai can launch US service, particularly in First class, currently only offered on BKK-NRT and BKK-LHR
Would be nice to see Thai have the critical mass to relaunch proper first class, starting with their once great ground experience in BKK
Having enjoyed the Thai F experience on the LHR-BKK route, on several occasions over the years, I can attest to the fact that U.S.-BKK passengers are missing something of worth.
It obviously has to be BKK-SFO or LAX to get United's feed, just as AC operates the BKK flight from YVR. ULH flights to any of ORD/IAD/EWR/YYZ/YUL don't make sense for what is essentially a seasonal leisure market.
@Steve for the winning comment.
FWIW: TG's U.S. routes sure must have been an especially horrific money drain for them to have been abandoned. Because this is an airline not particularly concerned with making a profit, at least in the past. Could they make it work second time round??
SEA-BKK would be closer than LAX-BKK no?
It also has a fraction of the origin market, no consular services, and limited partner service.
No way SEA gets chosen (by TG) over LAX or SFO, initially. Both Star hubs, both much larger markets (in general, and for Thailand), marginally longer distance.
BKK-LAX is the obvious choice, the question is if they can make the economics work.
BKK is a very popular destination, I'm just not sure it's a consistently premium destination in the same way something SIN is, which is how SQ makes their own ULH routes successful.
The recent growth of Taiwanese carriers also significantly undercuts TG's nonstop service. LAX-TPE-BKK is practically the same distance as LAX-BKK, for anyone not directly based out of LAX,...
BKK-LAX is the obvious choice, the question is if they can make the economics work.
BKK is a very popular destination, I'm just not sure it's a consistently premium destination in the same way something SIN is, which is how SQ makes their own ULH routes successful.
The recent growth of Taiwanese carriers also significantly undercuts TG's nonstop service. LAX-TPE-BKK is practically the same distance as LAX-BKK, for anyone not directly based out of LAX, the Taiwanese carriers will offer a more competitive product and schedule selection, as there are tons of TPE-BKK frequencies on any given day.
Regardless, always great to have more TPAC options if this does come to fruition.
I second Steve’s comment Ben
Unrelated to this article: it sure has been easier reading the comments sections of the non-political affiliated articles the past few weeks...can you make that vacation permanent? Wish Gary and Matthew would do the same...
Damn even when he’s not here y’all still mention him. Stockholm syndrome at its finest.
I have learnt a lot from Mr. Dunn's posts. I have however learnt nothing from yours except to note that someone lives rent free in your head.
Ben would be doing a disservice to the community if the poster is banned permanently.
During its heyday when Thai flew to Lax, its first class was a pretty good product. I look forward to its return. More competition is never a bad thing.
Damn even when he’s not here y’all still mention him. Stockholm syndrome at its finest.
Damn even when he’s not here y’all still mention him. Stockholm syndrome at its finest.
Damn you need to post the same thing 3 times.
Tim's fake account at its finest.
Damn, you feel the need to post a comment on every single article Ben posts, while using a largely outdated and racist term - “Eskimo” and still can’t be bothered to create an account. Fascinating.
Damn you need to act hypocrite after doing the same thing to protect Proximanova with quromcall or whatevercall. Double standards at its finest.
Eskimo, Mason. There are those who post herein who would accuse you two of being one and the same person. However, I couldn’t possibly comment …. :-)
It wasn’t intentional obviously
@Travelwithdavid, we know he’ll be back in a few weeks and that the vacation will soon end. That’s why we bring him up, as a way to point out how refreshing it is here.
If he was gone permanently, he would barely be mentioned.
I’m not so sure Mark, there are quite a few compulsive, obsessive individuals who like to keep the memory alive …. :-)