Boeingman From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 27 posts, RR: 0
Reply 1, posted (11 years 3 weeks 2 days 18 hours ago) and read 4250 times:
i think the worste airport, to connect inis JFk in new york. all the terminals are seperate. so u would have 2 take a shuttle or something. and maybe frankfurt(germany)thats a bad one. the best airporrt i think to connect in is SFO, or LAX. denver is a good one.
FlyingNanook From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 830 posts, RR: 12
Reply 2, posted (11 years 3 weeks 2 days 18 hours ago) and read 4210 times:
I've never connected in LAX but I've spent a good deal of my life flying in or out of there and I think it would royally suck to connect there if you had to change terminals, especially if you were to go from T3 to T6. (or any terminals on opposite sides).
SEA also is no fun to connect in especially when changing terminals in a manner that you have to pass through security (such as terminal C to B), especially with all the construction going on. The security lines there are longer than I've seen elsewhere lately.
As for one I like, this may sound weird but I have a soft spot in my heart for ORD. I have good memories transitting from the main United terminal to the United Express terminal (sorry I don't remember the terminal letters/numbers) and having to take the underground walkway with the neon lights on the ceiling. For all I know that is gone now since I haven't done that since the early 90's. But I like the memories of it.
GuyBetsy1 From Canada, joined Aug 2001, 840 posts, RR: 6
Reply 6, posted (11 years 3 weeks 2 days 17 hours ago) and read 4151 times:
Any airport that requires you to exit each terminal and go through security all over again in order to get into another one, is a good example of what a BAD airport is. Then most US airports would count as being bad for connections! JFK definitely takes the cake.
Airports that house everything everything under one roof (a giant one even), is good. HEATHROW may be a little behind the times in transfer methods, but you can still get in and around each terminal with relative ease. Some good European ones are ZURICH, AMSTERDAM, MUNICH, COPENHAGEN and yes, even FRANKFURT.
The Asian airports are what good and well planned airports should be. Namely , SINGAPORE, KUALA LUMPUR, HONGKONG (though it can be confusing given that arrivals and departures are on different levels), BANGKOK (ditto), TAIPEI. The only airport worth mentioning in Australia is MELBOURNE. All other Australian airports have seperate International and Domestic terminals. MELBOURNE is the only airport which has both in one buidling.
SHUPirate1 From United States of America, joined Sep 2003, 3670 posts, RR: 16
Reply 7, posted (11 years 3 weeks 2 days 17 hours ago) and read 4123 times:
FlyingNanook-I love connecting through ORD (the UA terminal, T1...never connected T1-T2 or within T3 on AA)...it's very straightforward, the connection between the B and C concourses is right in the middle of everything, and, yes, the laser light show in the underground concourse is still there...that said, spending a significant amount of time in the terminal (I spent 8 hours going LGA-ORD-IAH on 12/26, and 6 hours IAH-ORD-LGA on 12/31, due to VDB's) could drive you nuts, although I think you could say that about any airport...
Burma's constitutional referendum options: A. Yes, B. Go to Insein Prison!
Delta767300ER From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 2562 posts, RR: 11
Reply 9, posted (11 years 3 weeks 2 days 17 hours ago) and read 4076 times:
I prefer connecting in ATL for my flights! The layout of ATL w/ its 6 concourses paralell to each other makes it extremely easy! The concourses are linked bu moving sidewalks underground and an underground train. In 2002 I was connecting in ATL to CVG and I had to change concourses and had about 30 minutes to do so and I arrived at my gate without any problems.
LTBEWR From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 13286 posts, RR: 16
Reply 10, posted (11 years 3 weeks 2 days 17 hours ago) and read 4042 times:
Although EWR is my 'home' airport, so I don't have to transfer between flights and carriers there, for a multi-terminal building airport has to be among the better ones due to the monorail system that gives quick and frequent service connecting all 3 buildings,although have to go through security check to go to the gates. The new McNamara/Northwest terminal at DTW is very nice too, for transfers within NW, CO and other partner airlines in that terminal with a tram system operating with frequent and quick service from one end of the concourse to the other, and all within the secured gates areas. LRH can be crazy too. I recall transferring in 1995 from a EI flight from Dublin and staying within secured areas to connect to a BA flight to EWR, went through a maze of passageways, and a bus all within the secure areas to move between terminals.
Amhilde From United States of America, joined Oct 2003, 643 posts, RR: 5
Reply 16, posted (11 years 3 weeks 2 days 4 hours ago) and read 3808 times:
LAX isnt THAT bad to connect at- and the chances of one having to haul ass across the terminal arent that high- though I have had to do it before. But at least you can TELL where the other terminal is and can almost see it- some airports you have to read the map about 4 times to figure out what you are doing.
SEA was HORRIBLE last year because you do have to go in and out of security. I had to leave security just to get to a cash machine!
VIE is a little weird- I was transferring to an eastern Europe flight and came in off of a big jet on the top of the airport, then had to proceed through customs or whatever that was and then go down some back stairs somewhere to the "going to eastern europe" lounges- felt like I was at a GA airport with the ugly chairs and this big room with windows right on the tarmac with a bunch of people smoking and a naive religious group from the States making a fuss about the smoke ( I looked at the average ass size, then at the planes on the tarmac, back to ass size, back to planes, and wondered at exactly HOW they were going to fit this group on to one tiny little aircraft going to Bucharest, not to mention marvelling at the global transportation system that allows me to travel 8000 miles from my home only to be stuck in yet another small space with Hix from the Stix). Then a bus comes up and drives you over to your tiny little aircraft which is one in two long rows... basically there is no escaping from the "Going to Eastern Europe" room, and there is a minimal bathroom and a soda machine!
PHX ( even though I think its not a fun airport, its still pretty easy)
DFW ( cmon, weve ALL done the DFW run!)
LHR ( can get a little difficult if you have to transfer terminals)
Rducky From United States of America, joined Oct 2003, 72 posts, RR: 0
Reply 18, posted (11 years 3 weeks 2 days 4 hours ago) and read 3759 times:
Having just finished a flight from MCO-MIA-CLT on AA, I must say MIA is not an airport I would look forward to connect through, I will avoid it because of the construction that is ongoing, but I will add as soon as it is finished that will be my airport to visit. I've seen pictures of the final product it will be gorgeous. As for the best airport used for connecting in my opinion it would be CLE.
Juanchie From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 190 posts, RR: 0
Reply 23, posted (11 years 3 weeks 2 days 3 hours ago) and read 3592 times:
I would have to say ATL and CVG are two good airports to connect through. ATL Is extremely easy to get around except when the subway is down when you have to walk a good mile and a half. I had a connection a few months back in CVG and my second flight left 10 min after I arrived and I still made it. Its a nice airport and easy to maneuver.
God, forgive me for who I am, and help me be the man I want to be.