Between the two large European hubs used by Delta, CDG and AMS, are there any strategic network benefits or strategies one vs the other? I know AMS is considerably larger in terms of seats with several A330s per day. Regarding Delta specifically, does a majority of traffic typically connect onward from these hubs? Does one serve a certain niche for connections beyond or within Europe in place of other?

DL will see a clear difference between these two Euro hubs:

1. CDG is larger by 2.3 Million passengers - AMS sees 63.6 Million vs CDG 65.9 Million passengers
2. But......AMS is a much bigger as a transfer airport with 24 Million transfer passengers, while CDG sees less than half that ....at 11.5 Million transfer passengers.

So for DL: CDG will be more about point-to-point traffic - i.e. DL passengers to France & Paris, and Francophone Africa.

While AMS will be more for DL transfer passengers to Europe and other continents.

Capacity wise DL offers;

- AMS 19x departures
- CDG 11x departures

AMS is used more for connections as its a smaller home market, while CDG is more for local demand being Europes second largest travel market.

I fly DL a lot and always avoid CDG, AMS much better for connections. CDG is as sucky as Terminal 3 at LHR the DL insists on using!

petera380 wrote:

I fly DL a lot and always avoid CDG, AMS much better for connections. CDG is as sucky as Terminal 3 at LHR the DL insists on using!

I actually do the opposite. AMS immigration can get absurd at times (especially when those automated immigration terminals are down which seems to be half the time). CDG also allows SkyPriority access to immigration which generally makes it a very smooth process when connecting.

Although I do agree that AMS itself is a nicer airport. The Schengen terminal at CDG is especially bad and the AF lounge can get completely overrun at times. I just have had incredibly mixed experiences with immigration. Also the extra screening by Delta after you clear immigration and security can get really cumbersome as well. They technically do a screen in CDG as well but it takes a fraction of the time (although lately I've been taking Air France instead of DL metal so I avoid this as well)

I recently flew ATL-AMS and there couldn't have been more than 30 people at baggage claim in AMS, despite being a full flight.

As long as AF and CDG are subject to labor problems and strikes, passengers are likely to avoid connecting through CDG. AMS is a more reliable hub to fly through.

I travel from Cardiff to Portland Oregon a couple of times a year via AMS and find that it's seamless as I don't have to go through any security checkpoints at the airport. I have recently started to use CDG on the return because there is a 12.30 return to CWL compared to the 16.45 at AMS which means I don't have to wait 8 hours. Comparing the 2 and for passengers catching connections AMS is much better than CDG just wish it had a 12.30 flight to CWL!

In my limited experience, AMS is used predominantly for European connections while CDG is used for O&D as well as beyond Europe connections such as Africa and Asia. That's based on what pops up when doing online flight searches.

I have never been through AMS, but CDG is one of the more painful airports in Europe, either for O&D or connecting. The terminals themselves are generally pretty nice, but the layout of the place makes no sense. I always try to fly into ORY if I can.

In my experience, the gold standard of a connecting airport in Europe is MUC. Beautiful facility, very logically laid out, and never too much of a walk to get from one gate to the next.

I fly between Germany and the US on Skyteam a lot and as others have mentioned above, I try to avoid CDG at all cost and connect through AMS whenever possible, for many reasons:

1) At CDG I'll arrive on HOP at the crappy low cost terminal with a long bus transfer. At AMS it's always a short pleasant walk.
2) The lounge at AMS is much better in every aspect. More space, showers, better food, friendlier personnel
3) CDG or AF seems to be on strike half the time. I've never experienced that in AMS.
4) Obviously, AMS comes with a KLM Cityhopper connection while CDG comes with a flight on HOP. Enough said.
5) On the transatlantic segment, I get DL half of the time and AFKL the other half. Long haul on KLM is much better with more space (at least that's what it feels like), friendlier crew, better food. And Air France is not safe, they had some severe accidents or almost-accidents caused by human failure

I have never flown through CDG before, but the airport looks like a disaster. At AMS, all SkyTeam airlines are all in one terminal building and connections just involve walking, no terminal changes. Even if you have to walk a long distance, it is all in the same terminal. However, many SkyTeam airlines are located in different terminals other than 2E and the Satellite terminals, such as Kenya Airways and Saudi Airlines being located in terminal 2C.

intotheair wrote:

I have never been through AMS, but CDG is one of the more painful airports in Europe, either for O&D or connecting. The terminals themselves are generally pretty nice, but the layout of the place makes no sense. I always try to fly into ORY if I can.

In my experience, the gold standard of a connecting airport in Europe is MUC. Beautiful facility, very logically laid out, and never too much of a walk to get from one gate to the next.

I'd love to be able to connect through MUC, but LH just has twice weekly service to ODS. Westbound connections require an overnight stay in Munich and a total travel time of about 35-40 hours.

I think it's important to SkyTeam to have at least two large transfer hubs in Europe (there are also a few smaller, less important SkyTeam hubs in Europe such as FCO and PRG, but they are more specialized and have only a small handful of connections that AMS and CDG don't and also don't have the non-stop service levels to the US to serve as effective backups). AMS is a much easier transfer hub and I think that DAL favors it slightly for connections over CDG, but as mentioned earlier in this thread, there is more O&D to CDG and a few more connections outside Europe, so it will remain important.

I wish I had everyone's luck at AMS. I've gotten killed by immigration delays the last 3 times I've been there. Usually the machines keep breaking and they aren't able to get enough staff over to do manned immigration checks and then it turns into chaos. When its working, AMS is easily the better option but I've just had awful luck lately with immigration queues. Also, I should mention that this only applies when leaving the EU. When transiting at AMS to Europe, these problems don't happen.

AMS gets favored due to lower passenger taxes/fees on a routing that has similar transfer options CDG vs. AMS. Most passengers search for travel looking at the lowest cost, and thus AMS shows up there before CDG.

Same thing when searching for USA domestic routings on AA: CLT will "win" every time due to lower passenger taxes/fees on a routing that has similar options including PHL, DCA, DFW, MIA or ORD.

I must be the exception to the rule. Never had a problem with connections in AMS, but given that my home airport is PHL, all we have access to (of the two) is CDG...and when I've connected PHL-CDG-EU I haven't had any problems. Flights on time, friendly airport staff in CDG, and very quick passport/security screening. Taking the train between hall M and hall F was very quick. The return from hall F to hall K was almost as fast. I hope someday DL gives us 757 service to AMS, as it would make certain connections, like IBZ and CPT much easier, but I bet that won't happen until CDG either (1) goes back to being year-round, and/or (2) is upgauged to a 763.

I go to Europe 2 X per year and this year will require trips through CDG via Air France. The first trip will be with my wife where we will be flying from Barcelona to CDG to catch a LAX bound A380. There's only a 1 hour 45 minute connection time. Do any of you with experience making the transit through CDG using all Air France metal think this is doable?

syvjeff wrote:

I go to Europe 2 X per year and this year will require trips through CDG via Air France. The first trip will be with my wife where we will be flying from Barcelona to CDG to catch a LAX bound A380. There's only a 1 hour 45 minute connection time. Do any of you with experience making the transit through CDG using all Air France metal think this is doable?

You'll be fine. That's more than enough time to get through, especially since you only have to clear immigration on your way out. There isn't a second security screen when leaving Europe via CDG so its just the immigration line which really I've only had trouble with when transiting to Europe via CDG. When going the other direction, I haven't had an issue.

syvjeff wrote:

I go to Europe 2 X per year and this year will require trips through CDG via Air France. The first trip will be with my wife where we will be flying from Barcelona to CDG to catch a LAX bound A380. There's only a 1 hour 45 minute connection time. Do any of you with experience making the transit through CDG using all Air France metal think this is doable?

Yes, it is. I used to transit through CDG quite often, and never had any major issues.

intotheair wrote:

I have never been through AMS, but CDG is one of the more painful airports in Europe, either for O&D or connecting. The terminals themselves are generally pretty nice, but the layout of the place makes no sense. I always try to fly into ORY if I can.

In my experience, the gold standard of a connecting airport in Europe is MUC. Beautiful facility, very logically laid out, and never too much of a walk to get from one gate to the next.

MUC is one of the nicest airports to fly through but I like AMS over CDG everyday of the week. As long as you have your walking shoes. There is an awful lot of walking at AMS.

Thank you all for your replies. I'm used to going through AMS which I'm very comfortable with or flying directly to Dusseldorf.

I just transferred through AMS (KL to DL); do they have a new security setup now? we went through a rather large central security area going from F to D, and there was no more secondary screening at the gate. DL had a paperwork gate set up at D1, but it was just stupid questions and stickers. At least this time it was a lot better than the old secondary gate screening which dumped you into the penalty box to wait.

I don't think DL or any airlines flying to both AMS and CDG care about the passenger's experience. And certainly no that of a handful of a.netters.

Birdwatching wrote:

1) At CDG I'll arrive on HOP at the crappy low cost terminal with a long bus transfer. At AMS it's always a short pleasant walk.

You must be referring to Terminal 2G which is for regional aircraft. If you had flown a LCC you might indeed have ended up at Terminal 3 which is actually very simple but very roomy and practical. It would be nice if the automated train connect 2E with 2G, though.

Birdwatching wrote:

3) CDG or AF seems to be on strike half the time. I've never experienced that in AMS.

I'd say CDG is doing rather well if it sees 65M pax on only 180 days!

PITingres wrote:

I just transferred through AMS (KL to DL); do they have a new security setup now? we went through a rather large central security area going from F to D, and there was no more secondary screening at the gate. DL had a paperwork gate set up at D1, but it was just stupid questions and stickers. At least this time it was a lot better than the old secondary gate screening which dumped you into the penalty box to wait.

Yes, since 3 June 2015, they have installed central security screening for non-sterile passengers. You will only need to pass through security when you arrive from a destination that doesn't comply with the European and American security rules & regulations. Passengers arriving from Schengen & EU countries, from the USA and some more treaty countries (i.e. Canada IIRC), don't need to be screened when connecting. Passengers arriving from other destinations, require additional security screening.

There is a nice video about it on their YouTube channel: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dmm1pNs ... D&index=46

The E, F and G-piers are connected to the security re-screening area by means of a second non-sterile floor on top of the pier. The D-pier is only used for sterile passengers, with the two levels used to divide (secure) Schengen and Non-Schengen flights.

You are all praising AMS, but I actually preffer connecting at CDG over AMS.It has Pretty short immigration lines(unlike AMS). Also its very convenient to get from 2G to T2 and at AMS you need to walk forever. Also I had more pleasant flying experiences with AF than KL. Of course if I wasnt using DTW I had more convenient connecting options than both AMS or CDG.

11725Flyer wrote:

syvjeff wrote:

I go to Europe 2 X per year and this year will require trips through CDG via Air France. The first trip will be with my wife where we will be flying from Barcelona to CDG to catch a LAX bound A380. There's only a 1 hour 45 minute connection time. Do any of you with experience making the transit through CDG using all Air France metal think this is doable?

Yes, it is. I used to transit through CDG quite often, and never had any major issues.

It's not that CDG is a bad place to transfer. It's much better than a terminal change at JFK, EWR, PHL, international to domestic at HND, etc. But it's one of the worse experiences among the major European hubs.

It's also worth noting that in the past 10 years (post-2E reopening), CDG has gotten easier. If anything, AMS is now a little worse.

Birdwatching wrote:

I fly between Germany and the US on Skyteam a lot and as others have mentioned above, I try to avoid CDG at all cost and connect through AMS whenever possible, for many reasons:

2) The lounge at AMS is much better in every aspect. More space, showers, better food, friendlier personnel

Any lounge at 2E, but especially those at Gates K and M, beat hands down the Crown Lounge, any day, in all aspects you mentioned, but especially in food (and the Clarins Spa).

Cubsrule wrote:

It's not that CDG is a bad place to transfer. It's much better than a terminal change at JFK, EWR, PHL, international to domestic at HND, etc. But it's one of the worse experiences among the major European hubs.

It's also worth noting that in the past 10 years (post-2E reopening), CDG has gotten easier. If anything, AMS is now a little worse.

Excellent point! Any kind of connection in Europe is better than an international-to-domestic connection in any U.S. airport.

Cubsrule wrote:

It's also worth noting that in the past 10 years (post-2E reopening), CDG has gotten easier. If anything, AMS is now a little worse.

Yes indeed. It seems that at some point in the last few years, someone at CDG realized the power of good signage. 2E-2F connections are downright easy these days. Connecting with older 2A-2D gates is still a bit of a hassle, or was last time I had to do it, but at least now one has a chance of heading in the right direction!

PITingres wrote:

Someone at CDG realized the power of good signage. 2E-2F connections are downright easy these days.

The AMS and CDG airport authorities have a close partnership through 8% cross-shareholdings.

In 2008, the Royal Schiphol Group and Groupe ADP (Aeroports de Paris) began a strategic collaboration called Hublink. The two airport companies have an 8% cross-participation in one another. The Parisian airports have made investments in the further expansion of capacity and quality over the past few years. The HubLink collaboration between Schiphol Group and ADP mainly centres around joint purchasing, innovation and the exchange of knowledge.

https://www.schiphol.nl/en/schiphol-gro ... cipations/

So perhaps AMS helped CDG with their signage.

usflyer123 wrote:

You are all praising AMS, but I actually preffer connecting at CDG over AMS.It has Pretty short immigration lines(unlike AMS).

The Netherlands Government has announced an expansion of its border police at AMS in 2017 with 135 additional staff added to meet shortcomings.