Hblu2

Which would be the easiest (Airport)for an inexperienced traveller?:
Brussels, Frankfurt, or CDG? All opinions welcome!!

Kristian

[email protected] (hblu2) wrote:
    >Which would be the easiest (Airport)for an inexperienced traveller?:
    >Brussels, Frankfurt, or CDG? All opinions welcome!!
----------
Based on that criteria, Brussels would have my vote .
Its a nice, modern, airy and well designed airport, with basically
two terminals (Schengen/non Schengen ?).
You may be in for some serious walking though for getting from one
place to another , but once you´re at the right terminal you simply
can´t get lost.
Lots of space also, I think Brussels could easily handle double as
many passengers as it is doing now.


Kristian

EvelynVogtGamble

hblu2 wrote:

    > Which would be the easiest (Airport)for an inexperienced traveller?:
    > Brussels, Frankfurt, or CDG? All opinions welcome!!


Which languages do you speak? It's true Brussels and CDG have plenty of
Englsih-speaking personnel (I've never been to Frankfurt, but I assume
it does also). However, if you don't speak the language of the country,
it's easy to overlook announcements over the P.A. system that affect
your flight. I would have missed my return flight to LAX from CDG, last
time I was there, had the wheelchair attendant who brought me to the
initially assigned gate not ignored my assurance that I'd be okay from
that point, and come to get me and take me to the new gate. (I'm sure
there was an announcement of the change, but I had missed it.)

Rogerke

On 25 Jul 2004 13:08:20 -0700, [email protected] (hblu2) wrote:

    >Which would be the easiest (Airport)for an inexperienced traveller?:
    >Brussels, Frankfurt, or CDG? All opinions welcome!!

brussels ...

Sjoerd

"hblu2" <[email protected]> schreef in bericht
news:[email protected]...
    > Which would be the easiest (Airport)for an inexperienced traveller?:
    > Brussels, Frankfurt, or CDG? All opinions welcome!!

Brussels is the best of these three. Frankfurt is also OK. Avoid CDG at all
costs. I just transfered twice at CDG (Air France to Air France, so nothing
complicated in theory), and it was a complete mess. No signs, I needed to
take a bus between two sections of the same terminal, I had to literally
climb over other people's bags to reach my gate, hot all over the place,
unfriendly, incompetent staff, etc.,etc. I travel internationally about 3
times / month, and there is no airport I hate as much as CDG.

Sjoerd

Markku Gr?nroos

Sjoerd kirjoitti:

    >Brussels is the best of these three. Frankfurt is also OK. Avoid CDG at all
    >costs. I just transfered twice at CDG (Air France to Air France, so nothing
    >

Their terminals do not collapse quite every day. To suggest to "avoid" a
major Western European hub by "all costs" is dull. If an experienced or
non-experienced air traveller wants to get from one point to another it
is about the same via which intermediate points the routing takes place.

Sjoerd

"Markku Grönroos" <[email protected]> schreef in bericht
news:[email protected]...
    > Sjoerd kirjoitti:
    > >
    > >Brussels is the best of these three. Frankfurt is also OK. Avoid CDG at
all
    > >costs. I just transfered twice at CDG (Air France to Air France, so
nothing
    > >
    > >
    > Their terminals do not collapse quite every day. To suggest to "avoid" a
    > major Western European hub by "all costs" is dull. If an experienced or
    > non-experienced air traveller wants to get from one point to another it
    > is about the same via which intermediate points the routing takes place.

Nonsense. At airports such as Amsterdam, Hong Kong, Seoul, Singapore,
transfer is a pleasure and *very* easy. At most airports, transfer takes
place without too many headaches. At CDG, it is a challenge to get from your
arrival to your departure gate. It is an unpleasant and stressful
experience, even for an experienced traveller like myself.

Sjoerd

Markku Gr?nroos

Sjoerd kirjoitti:

    >>Their terminals do not collapse quite every day. To suggest to "avoid" a
    >>major Western European hub by "all costs" is dull. If an experienced or
    >>non-experienced air traveller wants to get from one point to another it
    >>is about the same via which intermediate points the routing takes place.
    >>
    >Nonsense. At airports such as Amsterdam, Hong Kong, Seoul, Singapore,
    >transfer is a pleasure and *very* easy. At most airports, transfer takes
    >

I haven't been to the Paris airport recently so that I could say any
first hand information. Last time I visited the airport and one of the
Air France terminals, it was just like any other airport in the world
and I didn't get lost. Airports are merely air travelling terminals. How
"nice" they are is of the lowest priority (unless you have to spend 100
hours there). Timetables (to lesser extent though) and prices (now we
are talking) are true parameters of choice for casual travellers. I have
been several times in trasit at Sheremetyevo and the Charles de Gaulle
airport certainly is not inferior to it. Flying through Moscow to Asia
has been economical and therefore I have been prepared to suffer from
some inconvenience. I understand that unexperienced travellers may have
lots of fears how to cope with different situations so alien. However,
there are hordes of ground personnel to guide one such passenger through
the right gates. And none of those gates at the Paris airport leads to
Dante's Inferno. No problemo

    >place without too many headaches. At CDG, it is a challenge to get from your
    >arrival to your departure gate. It is an unpleasant and stressful
    >experience, even for an experienced traveller like myself.
    >
If one is flying 10 hours from the US west coast at night knees almost
in his mouth without hope for anyhow decent sleep onboard, the French
airport should be an easy business really. It depends naturally how long
one has to be in transit. If the only comparative factor for a traveller
is which airport of these three to choose between, you can cast dice and
it will be all the same.

EvelynVogtGamble

Markku Grönroos wrote:

    > Sjoerd kirjoitti:
    >
    >> Brussels is the best of these three. Frankfurt is also OK. Avoid CDG
    >> at all
    >> costs. I just transfered twice at CDG (Air France to Air France, so
    >> nothing
    >>
    >
    > Their terminals do not collapse quite every day. To suggest to "avoid" a
    > major Western European hub by "all costs" is dull. If an experienced or
    > non-experienced air traveller wants to get from one point to another it
    > is about the same via which intermediate points the routing takes place.

Because I feel more secure transferring where I speak the language (and
refuse to transfer in the U.S., since it requires clearing customs at my
touch-down point, instead of my final destination), I TRY to arrange any
European transfers at LHR. (But of course that's not always possible -
one is limited to the routes one's airline offers to one's chosen
destination).

Cathy Kearns

"hblu2" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
    > Which would be the easiest (Airport)for an inexperienced traveller?:
    > Brussels, Frankfurt, or CDG? All opinions welcome!!

I haven't used Brussels, but I much prefer Frankfurt over CDG. We had a
Luftansa flight with a transfer in Frankfurt. The scheduled transfer time
only allowed 45 minutes (coming from SFO, going to Florence). We called the
airline to ensure they ticketed it right, they said no problem, you will
easily make your flight to Florence with time to spare, and we did. Signs
were easy to follow.

I've been through CDG many times. I always found my way, but it was never
as easy as Frankfurt.

Olivers

EvelynVogtGamble(Divamanque) extrapolated from data available...

    >
    >
    > Markku Grönroos wrote:
    >
    >> Sjoerd kirjoitti:
    >>
    >>> Brussels is the best of these three. Frankfurt is also OK. Avoid CDG
    >>> at all
    >>> costs. I just transfered twice at CDG (Air France to Air France, so
    >>> nothing
    >>>
    >>
    >> Their terminals do not collapse quite every day. To suggest to
    >> "avoid" a major Western European hub by "all costs" is dull. If an
    >> experienced or non-experienced air traveller wants to get from one
    >> point to another it is about the same via which intermediate points
    >> the routing takes place.
    >
    > Because I feel more secure transferring where I speak the language
    > (and refuse to transfer in the U.S., since it requires clearing
    > customs at my touch-down point, instead of my final destination), I
    > TRY to arrange any European transfers at LHR. (But of course that's
    > not always possible - one is limited to the routes one's airline
    > offers to one's chosen destination).
    >
Even the common language is hardly justification for a few hours in penal
servitude at LHR, a veritable Dantean Gate to a Hades of horrici
descriotion.

CDG? A collapsing edifice in a state surely gasping its last, certain to
be overrun with Street Arabs, clochards and the Bon Mots of its Magdas.

FrankfurtMain? My first night there (a long time ago) was spent in the old
Luftwaffe Officers' billets across the field where the soot-stained outline
of the discredited national symbol loomed over the entrance, a grim
reminder.

That leaves Brussels, less crowded, that alone a major positive point,
although Belgians on the whole are among the best fed but least amiable of
Western Europeans.

Personally, I like Milan, its security ostentatiously visible but on close
examination as inept as only the Italians can make it, a ravening but
pleasant mob at the Departure security barrier, long walks but easy carts,
and a pervasive healthy cynicism.

TMO

Miguel Cruz

EvelynVogtGamble(Divamanque) <[email protected]> wrote:
    > hblu2 wrote:
    >> Which would be the easiest (Airport)for an inexperienced traveller?:
    >> Brussels, Frankfurt, or CDG? All opinions welcome!!
    > Which languages do you speak? It's true Brussels and CDG have plenty of
    > Englsih-speaking personnel (I've never been to Frankfurt, but I assume
    > it does also).

The problem with Frankfurt is that it's so boring you'll want to chew your
eyeballs out.

Almost all the staff are fluent in English, though.

miguel
--
Hit The Road! Photos and tales from around the world: http://travel.u.nu

EvelynVogtGamble

Miguel Cruz wrote:

    >
    > The problem with Frankfurt is that it's so boring you'll want to chew your
    > eyeballs out.

Wen it's a matter of transfer points for international travel, IMO
"boring" is good! So long as there's lavatory access (if it's a long
layover), I'm perfectly happy with a place to sit and a good book, until
my flight is called.

David Horne

Miguel Cruz <[email protected]> wrote:

    > EvelynVogtGamble(Divamanque) <[email protected]> wrote:
    > > hblu2 wrote:
    > >> Which would be the easiest (Airport)for an inexperienced traveller?:
    > >> Brussels, Frankfurt, or CDG? All opinions welcome!!
    > >
    > >
    > > Which languages do you speak? It's true Brussels and CDG have plenty of
    > > Englsih-speaking personnel (I've never been to Frankfurt, but I assume
    > > it does also).
    >
    > The problem with Frankfurt is that it's so boring you'll want to chew your
    > eyeballs out.
    >
    > Almost all the staff are fluent in English, though.

I'd choose it over the smoke-filled, ATM-less (in much of the airside
sections) over-priced and under-air-conditioned dull new CDG terminal
buildings anyday...

David

--
David Horne- www.davidhorne.net
usenet (at) davidhorne (dot) co (dot) uk

Cactus

I agree Brussels. Train to town.If you have options
Zurich would be better.

"hblu2" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
    > Which would be the easiest (Airport)for an inexperienced traveller?:
    > Brussels, Frankfurt, or CDG? All opinions welcome!!