If you were planning to park at Don Mueang International Airport next year and stroll off into the sunset (or the departure lounge), you might want to rethink your budget. Starting December 1, Don Mueang is overhauling its parking charges — and for many travellers that means a noticeable bump on the way out, before you even board a plane.
What’s changing — the new parking rate breakdown
The airport says the revision is designed to cover rising operational costs and to help improve facilities, but the effect is clear: long-stay parking will be significantly more expensive. The updated hourly-based tariff (with partial minutes rounded up to a full hour) applies to the basement car park at Terminal 1, the seven-storey car park near Terminal 2, and the three-storey car park in the old building. The first 15 minutes are still free, but after that the prices climb quickly:
- 1 hour: 25 baht
- 2 hours: 50 baht
- 3 hours: 80 baht
- 4 hours: 110 baht (up from 40 baht)
- 5 hours: 145 baht (up from 60 baht)
- 6 hours: 180 baht (up from 80 baht)
- 7–24 hours: 250 baht (up from 110 baht)
That jump from 110 to 250 baht for 7–24 hours is the headline grabber — more than double the previous rate for an entire day.
Why the hike? Airport justification and scepticism
Don Mueang officials are framing the increase as a necessary adjustment. According to the airport’s public statement, the revised fee structure will help maintain service standards and better manage growing demand for parking spaces. They also pointed out the move aligns the airport with pricing at other major regional hubs.
Not everyone is convinced. Frequent flyers and long-stay parkers have already voiced frustration, with many calling the surge “excessive.” For travellers who typically leave their cars at Don Mueang for a week of holiday — or relatives dropping off loved ones for long-haul departures — the added cost could change behaviour. Some critics warn the higher prices may encourage more people to opt for taxis, ride-hailing, or public transport to avoid the steep daily fee.
How this might change travel behaviour (and a few money-saving hacks)
If you’re a regular Don Mueang user, the increase is worth factoring into your travel math. Here are a few practical options and tips to dodge the sting:
- Use public transport or airport shuttles where convenient — they’re often cheaper, and the airport itself is nudging passengers in that direction.
- Consider drop-offs: if someone can drop you at the terminal and head off, you’ll only pay the 15-minute free window (or a minimal short-stay fee if delayed).
- Look for off-site long-term parking operators — some private lots near the airport compete on price and include a transfer shuttle.
- Carpool or combine trips with friends/family to reduce the number of cars needing space.
- If your flight is business-class or you’re time-poor, compare the cost of taxis versus parking; sometimes paying for a ride is cheaper and more convenient than a multi-day parking ticket.
Practical details and contacts
The new rates take effect on December 1. For questions or clarification the airport has set up round-the-clock channels:
- Public Transport Management Centre: 0-2535-1247 (24 hours)
- Don Mueang Airport Public Relations Centre: 0-2535-1192 (24 hours)
Quick aside: new airline arrival at Don Mueang
In other airport news, Thailand’s aviation scene welcomed a fresh face as Thai SmartLynx Airlines took delivery of its first jet — an Airbus A320 that arrived at Don Mueang on August 22. The 13.4-year-old aircraft, now registered HS-SXA, previously flew with SilkAir and had been stationed in Denpasar for maintenance before making its transfer to Bangkok. For aviation buffs and frequent flyers, new airlines and aircraft can mean more choices — and more competitive fares — even as parking gets pricier.
Bottom line
If you park at Don Mueang, December 1 is the date to mark in your calendar. The airport argues the increase is needed to keep services up to scratch; travellers say the timing stings. Either way, a little forward planning — or taking public transport — could save you more than a few baht on your next trip out of Bangkok.
This is outrageous — doubling the daily rate will hit frequent travellers and families hard. The airport claims maintenance, but where are the specifics and a breakdown of costs? If Don Mueang wants to be fair, they should offer loyalty discounts or capped weekly rates.
Totally agree, Larry. Many of us leave cars for a week when visiting relatives, and this feels like a cash grab. A capped weekly price would be reasonable and keep regulars from being pushed to sketchy off-site lots.
Calling it a ‘cash grab’ without data is knee-jerk though. Operational costs have risen everywhere; airports worldwide have adjusted fees. Still, transparency would help reduce anger and conspiracies.
Fair point, Nina, but transparency rarely comes through PR lines. If they publish the cost drivers and projected revenue use, public trust would rise. Until then, it reads like premium pricing with zero accountability.
Why should commuters subsidize nicer bathrooms? If the airport wants upgrades, charge for premium reserved spots and keep basic parking affordable.
Guess I’ll just take the train from now on. This is the nudge many needed to stop driving into the city. Public transport is cheaper and less stressful than paying a fortune to leave your car.
The train is fine if your schedule aligns, but with kids or lots of luggage it’s painful. Not everyone has a quick, direct rail link to Don Mueang late at night.
Avi, sure, but the trade-off is often worth it. Better planning and cheaper apps for luggage delivery could make public transport viable for most people.
Luggage delivery is still niche and expensive. Also, public transport reliability fluctuates; missing a flight because the train was late is a high-risk strategy for many travellers.
From an economic standpoint, this is classic price signaling to manage scarce parking resources. Higher fees will reduce congestion and shift demand to alternatives, though distributional impacts are real. The airport could pair price hikes with improved public transit information to ease the transition.
I appreciate the economics explanation, but distributional impacts mean lower-income travellers will bear the brunt. Have policymakers considered targeted subsidies or weekend caps?
Krit, targeted interventions make sense but require administrative overhead. A simpler step is differential pricing: off-peak discounts or validated coupons for residents, which balance efficiency and fairness.
Differential pricing could work, but implementing it without gaming the system is the real challenge. People will find loopholes unless validation is robust.
I’ve used off-site lots for years and saved a ton. This hike just makes the private lots more attractive, and local entrepreneurs will profit. Airport authority may have indirectly boosted competition.
True, but not all off-site operators are trustworthy. I’ve read horror stories about scratched cars and long waits for shuttles. Lower price isn’t worth the risk for some people.
Priya, pick well-reviewed lots with CCTV and insurance. There’s always risk, but proper selection reduces it and still beats the new daily rate.
We need a regulated accreditation for off-site lots then. If the airport benefits indirectly, they should enforce minimum standards so passengers are safe and providers are vetted.
Agreed. I’d pay a small premium for an accredited lot with guaranteed shuttle times and insurance.
Also consider the environmental angle — higher parking fees might reduce cars and emissions near the airport. But if everyone switches to taxis, emissions could increase. Policy design matters.
Exactly. If the aim is lower emissions, pair fees with improved public transit and incentives for EV drop-offs. Otherwise you’ll just redirect congestion, not eliminate it.
An EV drop-off lane and discounted short-term parking for electric vehicles could be a constructive incentive, balancing revenue and sustainability goals.
The 15 minutes free is useless when traffic is terrible. I once paid because the curb was full and we were 20 minutes late getting out. They should extend the free window to 30 minutes at least.
A 30-minute grace period sounds reasonable, especially for drop-offs and delays. Small operational tweaks like that reduce needless anger and parking revenue disputes.
But longer free windows encourage people to wait and clog the curb more. Short windows keep turnover high. It’s about finding the right balance.
I feel for small businesses that do airport pickups for tourists. The new price could add up if they run multiple trips a day. Maybe corporate or multi-trip passes should be introduced.
Corporate passes are a good idea. Offer subscription models for airport taxis and shuttle operators so they aren’t penalized by ad-hoc fees.
Honestly, this reeks of poor timing. Post-pandemic travel surges are still recovering and now travellers get price shocks. Airports should phase changes in, not pinch people all at once.
Phasing would lessen the shock but also delay necessary funds. It’s a political choice: short-term pain versus long-term facility decay.
Why not offer pre-paid weekly parking vouchers online at a discount to encourage loyalty and guarantee revenue? It’s a win-win for travelers and the airport.
Pre-paid vouchers are convenient but open to fraud. They’d need strong digital verification tied to license plates, which is doable but requires investment.
If the airport claims alignment with regional hubs, show us comparator data. Which airports charge similar long-stay rates and what’s included in those fees? Context matters before we scream ‘rip-off.’
Sam, benchmarking is crucial. Some hubs include shuttle services, security patrols, or covered parking. A transparent comparison could justify or disprove Don Mueang’s position.
Even with comparators, local incomes differ. What looks normal in Singapore or Seoul may be harsh in Bangkok. Local affordability should be part of any benchmark analysis.
The PR lines about demand management are suspect when rates jump so steeply. If demand is the issue, they can implement dynamic pricing rather than a blunt day-rate hike. Dynamic models are fairer and more efficient.
Dynamic pricing works best with good data and public trust. Right now, people will suspect price gouging unless the algorithm is transparent and capped.
Transparency and caps should be mandatory for algorithmic pricing. Otherwise it becomes opaque profiteering, not demand management.
As a travel writer I predict behavior shifts: more ride-hailing and off-site parking ads. Stories will pop up about desperate last-minute drop-offs and long shuttle waits. It’s material for content but annoying for readers.
You’ll get clicks, sure, but people’s real problem is budget strain. Readers want practical tips, not just dramatized complaints.
Point taken, Joe. I’ll focus on comparisons and vetted off-site providers so readers can make informed choices.
What about disabled passengers and elderly visitors? Price hikes might not affect them much but access and convenience matter more. The airport should ensure priority short-term spaces remain affordable.
Agreed. Accessibility shouldn’t be monetized. A carve-out for special needs is essential and ethically required.
I left my car for 10 days last year without issues. Paying almost three times that feels dishonest. Airports should offer a reasonable long-stay flat rate for week-long travel.
Flat weekly rates are simple and traveler-friendly, but they reduce the airport’s ability to nudge behavior. Still, a hybrid model with weekly caps would be more palatable.
Also remember the new airline arrival mention in the article. Increased passenger volumes from new carriers could justify infrastructure spending, but that should be clearly communicated.
Yes, new carriers may increase turnover, requiring more investment. But correlation doesn’t equal justification for doubling daily fees without detail on capital plans.
Exactly. Show the projects and timelines and maybe people will accept the price as an investment, not a penalty.
I run a small shuttle service and these changes will affect my margins. If customers avoid parking by taking taxis, my business could suffer too. The ripple effects matter.
Maybe diversify into partnerships with off-site lots to offer packaged deals. Adaptation can offset lost business from fewer park-and-ride customers.
Good idea, grower134. I’m already exploring that and discussing accredited lot partnerships with local operators.
This feels unfair. I save up for trips and now parking costs more than my overnight in some hostels. Airports should have student discounts or caps.
Student discounts would be a nice PR move and help affordability. Simple verification like student IDs could work for occasional travellers.
Back in the day airport parking was cheap and simple. Now everything’s packaged and monetized. It’s a sign of how travel has become more commercial and less public service.
Commercialization isn’t inherently bad if services improve. The problem is when pricing outpaces service gains and leaves vulnerable users behind.
If the airport is serious about reducing cars, invest in real shuttle frequency and reliability from residential zones. People won’t ditch cars for unreliable buses.
Agreed, Laila. I’ll look into writing a piece comparing shuttle schedules and reliability between terminals and private options to help readers.
Why not a tiered loyalty program? Regular flyers earn discounted long-stay or priority spots. It rewards frequent users and avoids alienating them.
Loyalty programs can be good but are often gamed by corporations. They need clear rules and enforcement so benefits reach genuine frequent flyers.
At the end of the day, people will adapt. Some will pay, some will change modes. The loudest complaints might not represent most users, but public pressure could force tweaks.
User42 is right that adaptation happens, but public pressure matters. If enough people voice concrete alternatives like vouchers and weekly caps, the airport might revise policy.
I’m more worried about enforcement and fairness. Will staff harass people over a few minutes, or will the system be sensible? Real-world implementation makes or breaks these policies.
Practical enforcement needs clear signage and trained staff, not aggressive towing or fines. Communication ahead of Dec 1 is crucial to avoid chaos.
Maybe we should petition for a community meeting with airport officials and representatives from public transport and businesses. Discuss real impacts before Dec 1.
A town-hall style meeting would be ideal. If enough stakeholders show up, officials might at least delay or soften the policy.
I’m fine paying more if the extra funds make terminals less chaotic and more secure. Tickets and infrastructure that actually deliver value justify higher prices in my book.
Maya, the key is evidence. If the airport publishes a plan with milestones showing how funds will improve facilities, many will be supportive.
One last thought: tourists may be surprised at arrival. Airports should add clear pricing info on flight booking pages and airline notifications so people aren’t caught off guard.
Good PR move, Zara. I’ll include that in my coverage: airlines and travel agents should notify passengers of parking policy changes to reduce surprises.