Once when transiting through LHR, I had landed in LHR T5, and next flight to BLR was also from the same terminal. When we came to departure area from arrivals, we were turned away to go to the central terminal, as they will allow passengers into T5 only 1.5-2hours before the flight! Had to take the internal train to go to main terminal and then come back to T5. Sounded stupid. Has anyone else faced such a situation?

LTU932 wrote:

What pissed me off about LHR is the fact that they only reveal the departure gate 60 minutes before departure. I'm told this is normal with all UK airports, to keep you shopping, but I still think it's wrong. Especially when going from T5A to T5C, knowing the departure gate that late is just wrong.

blrsea wrote:

Once when transiting through LHR, I had landed in LHR T5, and next flight to BLR was also from the same terminal. When we came to departure area from arrivals, we were turned away to go to the central terminal, as they will allow passengers into T5 only 1.5-2hours before the flight! Had to take the internal train to go to main terminal and then come back to T5. Sounded stupid. Has anyone else faced such a situation?

That's a UK thing. They do the same in their train stations: The platform is announced just minutes before departure and you are not encouraged to go there before. Why they do it I don't know. Maybe if you ask them they come up with a very profound explanation. But my theory is they do it just to be different.

From personal experience -

(LHR connections within T5 Europe-Domestic and vv. 2 years ago
LHR Within T5 Europe-US and vv. 8 years ago
LHR T3-T5 BA same Ticket Europe-Dimestic 7 years ago
CDG 2G-2G AF same Ticket Domestic-Domestic 6 years ago
CDG 2G-2E AF same Ticket Domestic-Europe 9 years ago
CDG 2B-2F AF same ticket Europe-Canada and vv. 18 years ago)
FRA T2-T2 Europe-Europe vv. 10 years ago
AMS only O/D within Europe 4 years ago)

It really depends where you're arriving from.
CDG 2G is the pits, but is only used by <100 seaters, so doesn't really affect most transfer pax. Other transfers within Terminal 2 (sic) between halls can be complicated.

FRA can be confusing, and (at the time) Security at each gate makes it slow.

AMS seemed clear enough, but again, Security at gate can make things run late if you're not anticipating queues at boarding.

LHR from domestic to T5 is easy (you walk straight into the departure area from the arrival gate), arriving from elsewhere within T5 you need to reclear security before accessing Departures, but the staff have always seemed courteous enough to me.
Changing Terminals however can be a PITA...

So, basically, it all depends on your routing and whether you have to change Terminals, in my (limited) experience.

In my experience:

LHR- pretty good for quick connections, though i do often arrive domestic into T2 or T5 so I've no formalities to go through. Staff are usually good, although when i was last in T5 a member of security was using extremely bad language whilst chatting to her colleague, whilst in the presence of children.

AMS- Great for connections but long queues and remote parked Cityhopper flights/short connections can be a little stressful.

CDG- I avoid like the plague if i have a short connection, particularly if changing between Terminals 1 and 2

FRA- Great airport, but a maze for those who aren't so familiar with the giant terminal.

My best airports in Europe for connecting have been FAE, KEF and CPH.

Ranking based on my experience:

1. Munich - The service where they pick you up at the plane with a car ensures that you can connect flights in as little as 5 minutes.
2. Brussels - Very nice terminal, compact and easy to navigate.
3. Zürich - Nice and efficient.
4. CDG - Very good for short connections, suitcases always make it. I love terminal 2G for those 40 minute connections. Just avoid terminals 2A, B, C and D, and any connections between terminal 1 and 2.
5. FRA - Too big, good luck if you have a short transfer and have to run from one extreme end of the airport to the other.
6. AMS - many lost suitcases, very cramped with too many people for the size. Very long distances will ensure that you only make your short connections with minutes to spare.


98. CPH - Many damaged suitcases and suitcases that didn't make the connecting flight. Too many shops crowded into the airport. Also very expensive for meals and drinks.
99. LGW - You get ejected out of the secure area and have to reenter security, allowing the thieves in security to steal your legally purchased liquids from the airport of origin. Then you get dumped in a very expensive and crowded shopping mall until 20 minutes before your flight.
100. LHR - Same as above, except you have to take the tube to the other terminals.

JayBCNLON wrote:

AMS is the worst when it comes to security check: 25 minutes queueing is common (they even have signs saying that it takes 25 minutes if the queue in front of security reaches a certain point, which it often does) and they are rude (if you don’t speak to them because you’re tired they will give you „special treatment“ shouting load at you and searching you thoroughly for 20 minutes). FRA is my choice.

My experience with security was somewhat different. Early departure, there was a line, the line moved quickly. Staff were very friendly and helpful and helped keep the line moving. Overall I thought the security experience at AMS was quite good.

LTCM wrote:

Best connecting airport in Europe?

BER

I've heard there has never been an aircraft delayed there.

I've actually connected at TXL. It was........interesting (are they working on a new airport there?). Having said that it was quite easy, immigration was a snap, walking distance minimal and everything worked on time. As far as amenities (shopping, restaurants, ect.....) not much going on, but overall it worked quite well.

A couple of people already mentioned it but the correct answer is.....D, none of the above. More specifically the best connection airport in Europe is MUC and compared to the "big four" it's not even close.

Definitely AMS. CDG and LHR are bad. Haven't been to FRA.

Off topic a bit - last summer we flew YYZ-KEF-AMS on Icelandair. In KEF we did the brief passport control. When we arrived in AMS (our final destination) we disembarked, went to bag claim and got our bags, and walked out with no passport control, which surprised us. I didn't think Iceland was part of the EU?

Chemist wrote:

I didn't think Iceland was part of the EU?

It is part of Schengen, which is the passport free zone of the EU.

EU membership itself doesn't give passport free travel, only Schengen membership does that. Schengen is an EU policy, but non EU members can join as well.

blrsea wrote:

None of the European countries are good options for India .

I echo this sentiment. SQ/CX if flying from the west coast and the ME3 if flying from the east.

VSMUT wrote:

Chemist wrote:

I didn't think Iceland was part of the EU?

It is part of Schengen, which is the passport free zone of the EU.

EU membership itself doesn't give passport free travel, only Schengen membership does that. Schengen is an EU policy, but non EU members can join as well.

Thank you for the great explanation!

Chemist wrote:

Definitely AMS. CDG and LHR are bad. Haven't been to FRA.

Off topic a bit - last summer we flew YYZ-KEF-AMS on Icelandair. In KEF we did the brief passport control. When we arrived in AMS (our final destination) we disembarked, went to bag claim and got our bags, and walked out with no passport control, which surprised us. I didn't think Iceland was part of the EU?

I meant to say "are good".

How does Keflavik rank in all of this?

What do people have against LHR? If the arriving and departing flight is at the same terminal, it should be pretty smooth - you go through security and then you're back airside for your outbound connection. Terminal to terminal connections are a bit more complicated but it's still pretty easy considering you don't have to walk as long as you might at, say, CDG.

AMS is a nicer airport as you can walk easily from your arriving gate to your departing gate.

LTU932 wrote:

What pissed me off about LHR is the fact that they only reveal the departure gate 60 minutes before departure. I'm told this is normal with all UK airports, to keep you shopping, but I still think it's wrong. Especially when going from T5A to T5C, knowing the departure gate that late is just wrong.

As for the question at hand, I can't judge CDG because I was never there. I have to say (based on my immediate experience) AMS first and FRA second. LHR definitely last.

Why do you need to know your gate more than 60 minutes in advance? Gates are always subject to change, so being told far ahead your flight's at C-gates, only to then have it change to B-gates wouldn't be very convenient. Plus, it takes no more than 15 mins to get to C gates, so I don't see the issue.

stl07 wrote:

How does Keflavik rank in all of this?

Not really comparable IMO, as it's only WOW and Icelandair, and KEF is a fraction of the size of the others. I've gone through KEF on WOW and it's very simple, if a bit crowded at times.

DAL763ER wrote:

Why do you need to know your gate more than 60 minutes in advance? Gates are always subject to change, so being told far ahead your flight's at C-gates, only to then have it change to B-gates wouldn't be very convenient. Plus, it takes no more than 15 mins to get to C gates, so I don't see the issue.

Because at least I know where to go. This isn't SJO or HAM, where it doesn't take more than 5 minutes from one gate to another, we're talking about T5 LHR. If I knew a gate and it would change for operational reasons, I'd understand (e.g. whenever I flew to EWR, where I had one boarding gate for my onward flight on my BP, but the FIDS showed a different ). But having to wait until 60 minutes before departure to know my gate or at least to know which concourse it departs (in the case of T5), when most international flights are almost ready to get boarding underway, is cutting it way too short for me, not just at T5, but also at T3. I was lucky that for LHR-HAM, I didn't have to go to T5B or T5C, and I just stayed at T5A, but that's no consolation.

In EWR, I never had to change terminals because all flights left from Terminal C, at DFW there is the Skylink, and AMS was simply a delight because I was able to find my departure gate 2 hours before departure. LHR, as impressive as T5 is, was a total letdown.

PITingres wrote:

stl07 wrote:

How does Keflavik rank in all of this?

Not really comparable IMO, as it's only WOW and Icelandair, and KEF is a fraction of the size of the others. I've gone through KEF on WOW and it's very simple, if a bit crowded at times.

Thanks, I have never been there so I didn't know its size.

LTU932 wrote:

DAL763ER wrote:

Why do you need to know your gate more than 60 minutes in advance? Gates are always subject to change, so being told far ahead your flight's at C-gates, only to then have it change to B-gates wouldn't be very convenient. Plus, it takes no more than 15 mins to get to C gates, so I don't see the issue.

Because at least I know where to go. This isn't SJO or HAM, where it doesn't take more than 5 minutes from one gate to another, we're talking about T5 LHR. If I knew a gate and it would change for operational reasons, I'd understand (e.g. whenever I flew to EWR, where I had one boarding gate for my onward flight on my BP, but the FIDS showed a different ). But having to wait until 60 minutes before departure to know my gate or at least to know which concourse it departs (in the case of T5), when most international flights are almost ready to get boarding underway, is cutting it way too short for me, not just at T5, but also at T3. I was lucky that for LHR-HAM, I didn't have to go to T5B or T5C, and I just stayed at T5A, but that's no consolation.

In EWR, I never had to change terminals because all flights left from Terminal C, at DFW there is the Skylink, and AMS was simply a delight because I was able to find my departure gate 2 hours before departure. LHR, as impressive as T5 is, was a total letdown.

For truly international (i.e, non-EU) flights, the gate is shown 80 or so minutes before departure and boarding starts 40-50 mins before departure. For EU flights, the gate is shown 60 mins before departure and boarding starts around 40 minutes before departure. They give you at least 20 minutes to make it to the gate and boarding probably won't even have started. Just to clarify, when the gate is shown, boarding is far from ready to start.

StuckInCA wrote:

I'm really surprised at the positive responses for FRA. I really don't care for that airport at all.

I connect at AMS whenever possible, but end up at CDG a fair amount and haven't had any particularly bad experiences.

I've had some of my worst experiences at FRA.

I agree. I’m surprised to read the glowing comments about FRA. The lack of available jet bridges, the long walks, the Term A toilets (or lack of them) — I’ve never had a good experience there.

CDG — long walks, long lines, rude employees.

LHR — I just transferred recently from AA to BA, and it went very smoothly.

AMS — I’ve never been there, but my colleagues have said it was fine.

DAL763ER wrote:

For truly international (i.e, non-EU) flights, the gate is shown 80 or so minutes before departure and boarding starts 40-50 mins before departure. For EU flights, the gate is shown 60 mins before departure and boarding starts around 40 minutes before departure. They give you at least 20 minutes to make it to the gate and boarding probably won't even have started. Just to clarify, when the gate is shown, boarding is far from ready to start.

Still, it doesn't change my opinion about LHR. Nice airport, but not so nice execution.

Bhoy wrote:

CDG 2G is the pits, but is only used by <100 seaters, so doesn't really affect most transfer pax. Other transfers within Terminal 2 (sic) between halls can be complicated.

FRA can be confusing, and (at the time) Security at each gate makes it slow.

AMS seemed clear enough, but again, Security at gate can make things run late if you're not anticipating queues at boarding.

AMS no longer has security at the gate. They luckily opened a central security about 2 years ago.

Haven't seen security at the gate in FRA at any of the times I connected there.

In my experience, CDG is easy and fast if you read up on it beforehand.

DAL763ER wrote:

What do people have against LHR? If the arriving and departing flight is at the same terminal, it should be pretty smooth - you go through security and then you're back airside for your outbound connection. Terminal to terminal connections are a bit more complicated but it's still pretty easy considering you don't have to walk as long as you might at, say, CDG.

"If"

It never has been for me, and you should never have to leave the secure zone during a connection. This practice is nothing but a way for British airports to extort passengers into buying more overpriced drinks/water.

DAL763ER wrote:

Why do you need to know your gate more than 60 minutes in advance? Gates are always subject to change, so being told far ahead your flight's at C-gates, only to then have it change to B-gates wouldn't be very convenient. Plus, it takes no more than 15 mins to get to C gates, so I don't see the issue.

Gates won't change 60 minutes prior to a flight out of LHR. I could understand if we are talking about Ryanair or Easyjet who do 20 minute turnarounds, but any flight out of LHR will have a gate assigned at least 60 minutes before the flight. 60 minutes before, most legacy airlines will already have arrived at the gate 60 minutes before departure.

Out of boredom, I've taken walks down the fingers/concourses in the past. Every gate is assigned to a specific flights well in advance of the aircraft even landing at the airport. They don't change. Many airports even list departure gates 6+ hours in advance these days.

VSMUT wrote:

AMS no longer has security at the gate. They luckily opened a central security about 2 years ago.

If you're flying with DL out of AMS (and possibly for any other US bound flight), you may have to go through an additional screening before being allowed to the gate. It's not at the boarding gate itself though. Don't know if KL and other other US carrier has that, but DL definitely has that screening and I saw that while on the way to my gate to my flight to PTY (departure was from the same concourse).

In LHR, you may have to go through an additional screening at the boarding gate for US bound flights. I've seen that on my AA flight to DFW over 3 years ago. We had to take out our laptops and turn it on because of security measures at the time. In HAM (to mention a smaller airport), the UA gate doesn't require any additional screening unless you're ordered to go through secondary inspection at the gate (so it's a random thing). There, you only have the security interview and docs check, screening at the central security checkpoint and passport control before entering the UA gate.

VSMUT wrote:

Bhoy wrote:

CDG 2G is the pits, but is only used by <100 seaters, so doesn't really affect most transfer pax. Other transfers within Terminal 2 (sic) between halls can be complicated.

FRA can be confusing, and (at the time) Security at each gate makes it slow.

AMS seemed clear enough, but again, Security at gate can make things run late if you're not anticipating queues at boarding.

AMS no longer has security at the gate. They luckily opened a central security about 2 years ago.

fair enough, like I said, it's 3 and a half years since I was there.

Haven't seen security at the gate in FRA at any of the times I connected there.

again, it's been even longer since I was at FRA,and I've only ever had bus gatees to remote stands, so maybe those Security at the gates are just clustered around the bus gates, rather than the full Piers.

In my experience, CDG is easy and fast if you read up on it beforehand.

within the same Hall, I've no doubt it is straight forward. BUT...

DAL763ER wrote:

What do people have against LHR? If the arriving and departing flight is at the same terminal, it should be pretty smooth - you go through security and then you're back airside for your outbound connection. Terminal to terminal connections are a bit more complicated but it's still pretty easy considering you don't have to walk as long as you might at, say, CDG.

"If"

It never has been for me, and you should never have to leave the secure zone during a connection. This practice is nothing but a way for British airports to extort passengers into buying more overpriced drinks/water.

I can't say I've ever had to leave the Airside zone anywhere whilst making a [through ticketed] Connection with four exceptions -
December 1990 on a BA flight from ZRH to GLA with an enroute stop in BHX where we had to clear UK Customs in BHX as the second leg was also sold as a domestic flight, and back then I don't think there was an Airside connecting facility.
April 2006 in LAX coming off NZ6 from Auckland and waiting for NZ2 to London as I had to collect my bag, clear US Customs and drop my bag back at the transfer Carousel beyond that, then exit via Arrivals and take on TSA.
December 2010 at LCY as I was transferring from a domestic to an European BA Flight - LCY has no transit zone at all, so all baggage needs to be collected and rechecked if transferring.
November 2011 at CDG 2G, where I was transferring between two domestic French flights. 2G again has no transit zone, though bags can be checked through to the connecting flight without having to be rechecked. I realise that for transfers 2G to 2E (and presumably from there you can use the main Airside shuttle to the other Halls), there is an Airside shuttle Bus from 2G after Passport Control, but anyone connecting TO 2G needs to take the Landside Bus and clear Security at 2G, as there is no other secure entrance to the Departures level there.

I've connected at LHR multiple times, within T5, within T1 (RIP), T1-[old] T2 and vice versa, T1-T4 and vice versa, T3-T5, and never had to leave the Airside zone.

Bhoy wrote:

November 2011 at CDG 2G, where I was transferring between two domestic French flights. 2G again has no transit zone, though bags can be checked through to the connecting flight without having to be rechecked. I realise that for transfers 2G to 2E (and presumably from there you can use the main Airside shuttle to the other Halls), there is an Airside shuttle Bus from 2G after Passport Control, but anyone connecting TO 2G needs to take the Landside Bus and clear Security at 2G, as there is no other secure entrance to the Departures level there.

It might not have been the case then, but there is an airside bus from 2F to 2G these days, and 2G does have a transit zone. I've connected at 2G a ton of times, never had to leave the secure area.

ei146 wrote:

blrsea wrote:

None of the European countries are good options for India (and I assume for other South asian/African countries) if you are stuck in their airport for any reason (weather/aircraft gone mech etc). They will not let you out of the airport and treat you like crap. Europe connections are good only if things go well. Else, better for non-Western world folks to avoid it all together.

I am sorry about your experiences, but there is only so much the airport or the airline can do about it. At least at most European airports you have an "international area" that you can use for connections without a visa and without legally entering the country. In the USA you even need a visa for transfer.
If you have a visa you can of course leave the airport. For me as a German it is the same in India: I need a visa to be allowed in.
But even inside the international zone you usually have hotels and depending on the airline and the flight the airline may have to pay for it.

At CDG, the airport itself is horribly designed, requiring you to land and go around in bus to different terminal,

agreed

refusing to understand/talk in English and hard to find anyone for assistance.

In my experience this is a field were cultural differences collide.
One thing: In most countries in Western Europe (except UK and Ireland) English is not an official language. Most people learn some English in school, but don't need it in their daily lifes. So I would not necessarily expect a French bus driver to understand a lot of English. Also Western Europeans are used to British and American English. Some English variants and the pronounciation used in India or other Asian countries is actually difficult for us to understand. So if someone pretends to not understand you this person may actually not understand you.
The other thing, and this is difficult for me to write as English is not my native language and I don't know if I will find the right tone: When people from India or some other Asian countries have a question or a request to an information desk or an airline employee it looks to me often very demanding, agressive and unpolite. They may talk in what they think is the normal way to do so, but the reception on the other side of the desk is completly different, because that guy or gal is not used to it. MIx that with a bad day and you may actually get a rude response. This is not professional but human.

Agree 100%
I worked 15 years at CDG and what you describe cannot be more true.
My "best" experience in this area was an Indian pax who, while I was talking to him in English, semi yelled at me "English?" ....for a French who majored in English literature at University, I always believed I was fluent in English.... till that day!

I've transited through CDG, AMS and CDG ...... AMS was the best but both of my connections at LHR and CDG involved having to catch a bus between terminals.

Fiend wrote:

I've transited through CDG, AMS and CDG ...... AMS was the best but both of my connections at LHR and CDG involved having to catch a bus between terminals.

At LHR, changing terminals (barring between the T5 concourses) always requires taking a bus. The transfer between T5A and T3 took like 5-10 minutes for me IIRC.

Transiting at AMS can be a real pain. Every time I have transited through there the staff have been incredibly rude. Schengen to non-Schengen transfers can have extremely log walks between them if they are at either end of the airport, and passport control is frankly a mess. Lastly, the KLM lounge is terrible. I generally avoid AMS at all costs.

Bhoy wrote:

AMS seemed clear enough, but again, Security at gate can make things run late if you're not anticipating queues at boarding.

Didn't AMS move to a centralized security check? I thought the gate security check does not happen anymore.

DTWLAX wrote:

Bhoy wrote:

AMS seemed clear enough, but again, Security at gate can make things run late if you're not anticipating queues at boarding.

Didn't AMS move to a centralized security check? I thought the gate security check does not happen anymore.

Yes, they have. But for (at least DL-operated) flights into the US, they have additional security checks before you reach the gate.

LTU932 wrote:

DTWLAX wrote:

Didn't AMS move to a centralized security check? I thought the gate security check does not happen anymore.

Yes, they have. But for (at least DL-operated) flights into the US, they have additional security checks before you reach the gate.

From my experience: Connecting at CDG, AMS or FRA I usually don't have to go through any security as long as I stay airside. I went through security at my departure airport and that is enough. The only exception is when I connect to the USA, UK or Israel. These countries have special requirements which means a second security screening at the departure gate or when entering a certain gate area where these flights depart. In LHR I have to go through security every time.

ei146 wrote:

The only exception is when I connect to the USA, UK or Israel. These countries have special requirements which means a second security screening at the departure gate or when entering a certain gate area where these flights depart. In LHR I have to go through security every time.

Coming from where?

Coming from Schengen, I only experience a passport check before going to the UK, never any additional security checks. But the security in the UK is quite annoying.

I'm surprised by all the grief for LHR. I transit there a few times per year and while it's not the most pleasant experience it's not that bad. Out of LHR, CDG, AMS and FRA I think CDG easily takes the honor as the worst. I've been through a lot of airports in many countries but CDG is one where every time I go through I'm not 100% sure if I'm going the right way as the layout and signage is a bit confusing in places. I have a short connection in CDG coming in May and I'm not looking forward to it.

VSMUT wrote:

ei146 wrote:

The only exception is when I connect to the USA, UK or Israel. These countries have special requirements which means a second security screening at the departure gate or when entering a certain gate area where these flights depart. In LHR I have to go through security every time.

Coming from where?

Coming from Schengen, I only experience a passport check before going to the UK, never any additional security checks. But the security in the UK is quite annoying.

Coming from Schengen connecting to UK in FRA or AMS I had to go throuh passport and additional security checks. I never connected to the UK in CDG.

-LHR: Can't really say, as the last time I connected there was years ago, but I did enjoy arriving at, and departing from, T2. I imagine it would be annoying to clear security again when connecting, but surely it can't be worse than LGW.

-CDG: Terminal 2 is a nightmare if you don't know your way around, and I never enjoyed connecting there at all. Departing from 2E/2F, however, is fine.

-AMS: I want to like this airport as much as I like KLM (minus the catering and lounges), but I just don't. Endless walks from one pier to the next, long queues for passport checks when connecting international to Schengen, and some of the most revolting toilets I've ever seen in a European airport, particularly in Piers B/C. The one thing I do love is the viewing deck, which of course involves going landside.

-FRA: I can't say I mind transferring here. I'm not sure why - maybe it's because it is LH's home base and I feel "at home" in a way. That said, the terminals are indeed a maze and connecting can involve a half marathon, so it would definitely not top any list.

ei146 wrote:

Coming from Schengen connecting to UK in FRA or AMS I had to go throuh passport and additional security checks. I never connected to the UK in CDG.

That's weird. I connected through AMS too several times to the UK, but without any additional security. I'm guessing its a random thing then?

ADrum23 wrote:

Curious to know people's opinions on this subject. Of the "big four" airports in Western Europe (LHR, CDG, AMS, FRA), which is the best for connections to countries in Africa, the Middle East, India or even elsewhere in Europe? Which home airline (BA at LHR, AF at CDG, KL at AMS and LH at FRA) has the most connections to these places?

Well IMO, BA gets Indian passenger sensitivities better than the others in the list. But LHR can be a pain to transfer at. 3rd world bus terminals are better! AF staff both onboard and on ground are kinda ok if you speak French - otherwise they can be real jerks. The ground staff at CDG can be downright racist pigs. Until you start talking to them in French and they magically transform!

Havent flown KLM in a long while - the last time was when they had 40 year old DC10's flying into India. AMS is nice if you are planning a long overnight layover.

Between these 4 - I would choose AF/CDG as of now. Decent J/W product.