elnap29

Struggling here with booking our flights from the West Coast to Venice. (We'll be doing some travel in Italy and then perhaps spending a few days in Paris before flying home). I recall that CDG (Paris) was big and a bit complicated, and that we were glad at that time to have a 4-hour layover on a previous trip. But I'm wondering how much time I need to allow for changing planes to go to Venice. And which airports would be less complicated?? It seems our choices (depending on airline) would be Paris, Frankfurt, or Amsterdam or even Zurich.
Who has had experience? Any advice?
This travel planning certainly is exhausting! Thanks for your help.

NoFlyZone

...or JFK in New York.

I think that convenience of flight times would be more important than connecting airport. It is not all that easy getting to your hotel (or back to the airport for that matter) at certain times of the day.

For example, we were in Venice at the end of our trip about 3 weeks ago. I had selected the KLM flight which left Venice airport at 7:05 AM. Not a problem in most cities...maybe every other city. But here we had to be up early enough to be able to walk about 15 minutes (towing our bags) to a dock to catch a 03.13 boat to get to another dock to be on the 03.40 boat to the airport, arriving at 04.50 or so. (The next boat to the airport arrived way too late for the flight.)

So I don't think I would take KLM the next time we do that.

Arriving IN Venice may be easier because I don't think there are arrivals in the middle of the night. We arrived by train during the afternoon/evening rush hour and the lines for the boat (vaporetto) were long, we were really tires and the boats were really crowded. But I wouldn't recommend nor avoid that time of day, either.

elnap29

I've already looked at flight arrival and departure times in Venice, so I'm aware of what you are talking about. We'd like to leave the West Coast and fly nonstop to Europe, land somewhere there, as mentioned above, and then transfer to a flight to Venice. I won't book a flight that gets us there or leaves in the dark.

What is the airport like in Frankfurt? (Lufthansa)
Is CDG too difficult for making connections? (Air France)
Any other recommended connection point?

Gardyloo

It has as much to do with the airline(s) as with the airport. CDG is rather notorious for unpleasant transfers, but relatively easy if both flights are on Air France. I'm no huge fan of Frankfurt but it's efficient enough. Amsterdam is usually pretty easy. Ditto Zurich (Swiss International from LAX.)

British Airways is easy if both flights are through Terminal 5 at Heathrow. Madrid is (IMO) a great airport; Iberia starts nonstop service from LAX in April.

At FRA, AMS, MAD, or CDG you'd have to go through immigration (not customs) on arrival since all those countries are part of the Schengen common passport control area. That may also entail a terminal change, which would be the case for sure at MAD.

Melnq8

Of your choices, I'd vote for Zurich, with Amsterdam as a close second, assuming connections are good etc. I personally dislike Frankfurt, which reminds me of a rabbit warren. Not a big fan of CGD either, atlhough it's been awhile since I flew through there.

alanRow

Have to agree with Zurich as a first choice because it's so small though T5 at LHR is quite good (BA to BA only). Amsterdam always seems to be a long walk. You might also want to look at places like Brussels

travelgourmet

<i>...or JFK in New York.</i>

Or, during the summer, Atlanta. Personally, I wouldn't recommend JFK. Atlanta would be a pretty good option for the outbound flight, but you would have to deal with the immigration and baggage claim/recheck hassle for the return. Generally, I prefer to connect in Europe for the flights back to the US, but it would depend upon the timing. If I had to wake up at 5am to connect via Europe, then I might be inclined to deal with Atlanta. Also, my understanding is that immigration is a hassle at LAX, so that might make Atlanta somewhat more appealing.

<i>What is the airport like in Frankfurt?</i>

Not very good. Long walks and very, very few amenities. If you have a short connection, it is efficient enough, but if you have to spend any time there or want to, say, grab a snack, then I can't recommend it.

<i>Is CDG too difficult for making connections?</i>

I don't think it is difficult, but others do. However, I think it suffers from the same lack of amenities and long walks that plague Frankfurt.

Zurich - Smaller than the others, and relatively navigable. Expensive concessions and limited food choices. Also, the security setup is annoying, in that it is beyond the main shopping areas, so you are a bit 'trapped' at the gate. Temperature control is also a problem, IME. I don't particularly care for it as a connection point.

Amsterdam - Probably the best combination of efficiency, logical layout, and diversions of the airports you mention. Food options, however, are poor. Some of the walks can be very, very long.

Heathrow (assuming all BA itinerary) - Terminal 5 is probably the best transfer airport in Europe. Plenty of diversions and food choices. Pleasant and open layout. There is a decent amount of seating in the gate areas, which is not the case at most European airports.

My rankings (from first to last) would be: Heathrow, Amsterdam, Atlanta (especially outbound), <gap> de Gaulle, Zurich, Frankfurt. I have never connected via Madrid, so can't comment on that.

alanRow

"I have never connected via Madrid, so can't comment on that."

If you think Frankfurt or Amsterdam have long walks then you will have a hell of a shock at Madrid - beautiful terminals, lovely concessions but an absolute pain if you need to connect between Schengen & international or vice versa or need to change between otherwise identical terminals

Note that with the exception of Heathrow all of the European airports mentioned will do immigration checks on arrival BEFORE you can do your connection as all mentioned are within Schengen. At LHR you can do an airside transfer and avoid immigration until Venice. Same applies on the way back.

And as has been pointed out connecting in the US on the way back means collecting luggage and doing the TSA groping.

travelgourmet

<i>And as has been pointed out connecting in the US on the way back means collecting luggage and doing the TSA groping.</i>

Sure, but connecting via the European airports mentioned requires an additional security check at your transfer point - both coming and going. So you actually have the fewest security checks connecting via the US (once outbound, twice on the return). Personally, I have not found the US security checks to be any more or less intrusive than those in Europe.

alanRow

"Personally, I have not found the US security checks to be any more or less intrusive than those in Europe."

Have you been to the US in the last couple of weeks. If the reports are to be believed Obama has emptied the jails of all sex offenders and given them jobs with the TSA

alanRow

In any case the additional security check for US bound flights is done at the gate - so you know you aren't going to miss the flight unlike when you are at US immigration waiting then waiting for your luggage, checking it in again then waiting to go through the security check...

Gardyloo

<i>Have you been to the US in the last couple of weeks. If the reports are to be believed Obama has emptied the jails of all sex offenders and given them jobs with the TSA</i>

Have you?

I passed through seven US airports and one overseas airport in the past five days. Toughest airport security? Tokyo.

I encountered my first body-scanner yesterday at ORD. It took a lot longer to get through than usual because it was <i>me</i> who didn't follow the clear instructions - posted in writing and delivered in person by the cooperative and really quite skilled TSA people working my line. When they say "everything" out of pockets they mean "everything," and not just what I judged to be "important" to remove. As a result I got patted down - very professionally, very accommodating to my personal "space".

In Tokyo I got to keep my shoes on, but my carry-on was completely emptied out onto a table and the contents swabbed, then replaced (awkwardly) by an inspector who was too busy bowing to see what he was doing.

suze

From Seattle I've always used British Air's overnight flight to Heathrow, then arriving in the morning transferred on from there (to Amsterdam, Geneva, etc.). I've twice been to Venice but was already in Europe and went by train.

To your original question, I found Schiphol/Amsterdam very organized and easy.

HappyTrvlr

Both Zurich and Amsterdam are easy to navigate, Frankfurt can be confusing. My least favorite for changing plnaes is Heathrow.

elnap29

I had always heard that Heathrow was miserable; that's why I didn't consider it. So...how do you know if you will go in and out of Terminal 5?

Dayenu

We had a connection in Amsterdam going to Copenhagen on KLM, I remember it being easy, clear signs posted, a somewhat longish walk, but no problems. The souvenirs looked SO inviting to stop and get some

I was also in Zurich a few years ago, as a destination stop, it was very passenger-friendly.

elnap29

I really appreciate everyone's comments. This is the kind of discussion I was seeking. Thanks.

I think I've ruled out BA. From SFO, it seems a very long trip to go through Heathrow.

P_M

alan, we just flew to/from Aruba last week. Security checks on the US side were not bad at all. We first cleared security in our home city of Austin with no body scanner and no pat down. We had a very long layover in Miami so we left the secured area and re-cleared in Miami. Once again it was a piece of cake with no scanning or groping.

Coming back from Aruba we were patted down and searched but it wasn't too bad.

The all-time toughest security I have experienced was going to Israel. About half of my trip report is about Israeli security. It was really bizarre, but I suppose that is necessary in that part of the world.

suze

elnap~ I've only been to Europe (and back) five trips. Always going thru Heathrow. I've never had any difficulties, nothing "miserable" about it in my experience.

elnap29

Thanks, Suze. But I think for travel to Venice the trip is too long through Heathrow (like 33 hours) from the West Coast. I'm glad to know Heathrow wasn't a problem.