YoungFlyer From United States of America, joined Aug 2005, 176 posts, RR: 0 Posted (7 years 8 months 4 weeks 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 2794 times:
Hi,
I am a new member here and I hope this topic hasn't been discussed. I made a number of connections this year at CDG and we had to use so meant buses I lost count. One off the plane, between terminals, then to board the plane... Now as my username states I am a young flyer and haven't been to too many airports to have a full biased opinion on the subject. However, this was probably the worst connections I have had. Is this a norm in most airports?
Thanks for your opinions,
Dan
"An eye for an eye only makes the whole world blind" -Gandhi
Muttley35 From United Kingdom, joined Jul 2004, 126 posts, RR: 0 Reply 1, posted (7 years 8 months 4 weeks 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 2737 times:
In my rather limited experience CDG does use buses more than any other airport I have encountered .Partly I understand due to the roof collapse there a couple years back, though someone with better knowledge of CDG than me could give you a more detailed explanation as to why buses are so commonly used there.
Having only passed through CDG a couple times I found it to not be the best place to have close connection times especially if you arrive at 2E and need to leave from certain gates in 2F.
I am sure there are airports which are equally as bad to pass through if not worse but CDG is the worst I have encountered.
Regards
Markos
YoungFlyer From United States of America, joined Aug 2005, 176 posts, RR: 0 Reply 2, posted (7 years 8 months 4 weeks 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 2678 times:
here's another question. why is the situation like this?
Dan
"An eye for an eye only makes the whole world blind" -Gandhi
BostonGuy From United States of America, joined Jul 2000, 514 posts, RR: 8 Reply 3, posted (7 years 8 months 4 weeks 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 2673 times:
Quoting YoungFlyer (Reply 2): here's another question. why is the situation like this?
Oh, the French really enjoy doing things with a twist.
Sometimes they make sense and work, sometimes they don't.
CentralCA From United States of America, joined Aug 2005, 22 posts, RR: 0 Reply 4, posted (7 years 8 months 4 weeks 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 2647 times:
I've been to CDG but never connected there. However, last month I connected through MAD and could argue that it is in the same position. Especially when connecting from domestic to international and vice versa, buses everywhere. There should be less hassles when Iberia's new terminal opens.
JumboForever From France, joined Jul 2005, 199 posts, RR: 1 Reply 5, posted (7 years 8 months 4 weeks 22 hours ago) and read 2525 times:
Quoting BostonGuy (Reply 3): Oh, the French really enjoy doing things with a twist.
Hopefully all the French are not like this, but one surely does enjoy things with a twist : Mr Paul ANDREU, the designer of CDG airport. Just have a look at the excalator system in CDG1 to have a perfect example of such a 'thing with a twist'
As for buses, well firstly CDG is an airport with a lot of 'gates' but rather few jetways. This allows to maximize the number of planes that can be handled at the same time without having to build huge and expensive terminals. This is however really inconvenient for the PAX.
As for buses between terminal, I don't know what kind of connection you were doing through CDG, but if you were to connect between 2 planes coming from and leaving to a country outside of the Schengen zone, this bus allows you to go from one terminal to the other without having to go through immigration and customs (hence no need of visa). You stay within the in-transit area and you don't technically enter the French territory.
EmmenezMoi From France, joined Apr 2005, 70 posts, RR: 0 Reply 7, posted (7 years 8 months 4 weeks 6 hours ago) and read 2208 times:
I agree that CDG uses a lot of buses, but after coming back from FRA today, I can tell you that I prefer using buses to walking for miles as you literally need to do at FRA (and probably other airports)...
OzGlobal From France, joined Nov 2004, 2597 posts, RR: 4 Reply 9, posted (7 years 8 months 4 weeks 6 hours ago) and read 2156 times:
CDG would be much more pleasant if 2E were operating. Without it, it is a V6 firing on 4 1/2 cylinders! Hence, nowhere near enough gates to handle the traffic at T2, hence buses to stands. Then, T2 is very big and stradles two sides of a four lane highway. There are underpasses and you can actually walk between any two T2 terminal sectors, but you need some time and energy. Hence, intra-T2 buses. Finally, if you have the bad manners not to be flying a SkyTeam carrier (or one world BA, CX) then you are at T1. If you need to connect form T2 to T1, guess what? More buses.
Good news, next year the intra-Roissy train will open, eliminating buses between terminals. Then when 2E is rebuilt, there will be almost enough gates and fewer planes and stands, hence fewer air-side buses. Heaven.
When all's said and done, there'll be more said than done.
Kaitak744 From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 2208 posts, RR: 3 Reply 10, posted (7 years 8 months 4 weeks 1 hour ago) and read 2060 times:
Quoting BMIFlyer (Reply 6): Mybe because AF is one of Airbus' biggest customers?
No, he ment why are there so many remote stands comapared to the number of gates.
YoungFlyer From United States of America, joined Aug 2005, 176 posts, RR: 0 Reply 11, posted (7 years 8 months 4 weeks 1 hour ago) and read 2049 times:
Quoting OzGlobal (Reply 9): Good news, next year the intra-Roissy train will open, eliminating buses between terminals.
now that is a little more like it! still think that a AF A340 should get a gate and not an AF A320.
"An eye for an eye only makes the whole world blind" -Gandhi
Speedbird2155 From United Kingdom, joined Feb 2005, 847 posts, RR: 5 Reply 12, posted (7 years 8 months 3 weeks 6 days 20 hours ago) and read 1981 times:
This situation is present in many large international airports, where for space contraints and economic reasons, it simply isn't feasible to have every stand connected to the terminals. With lots of flights into and out of these airports it means that a percentage of flights will be from remote stands. This may seem inconvenient to passengers, but it is necessary to optimise the space available. In some cases if the airports were to attempt to connect these remote stands, it could mean building very tall bridges across taxi-ways as at LGW or possible underground tunnels, either of which could result in numerous complaints about the distance passengers have to walk. Even with T5 at LHR, there will be remote stands in use. There have been efforts to maximise the number of stands with jetways and at the same time reduce the time taken by passengers to reach each gate, but there isn't enough space to build jetways to each stand without reducing the space available for aircraft parking and taxiing.
Sponsor Message: 
From United States of America, joined Aug 2005, 176 posts, 
From United Kingdom, joined Jul 2004, 126 posts, 
From France, joined Jul 2005, 199 posts, 
From UK - England, joined Feb 2004, 8810 posts, 
From Iceland, joined May 2002, 232 posts, 
Printer friendly format 
