Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
CDG Overtakes FRA with Number of Scheduled Airlines  
User currently offlineannaaero From United Kingdom, joined May 2010, 12 posts, RR: 0
Posted (4 years 4 months 1 week 16 hours ago) and read 7560 times:

According to anna.aero analysis of the data, the Paris-Charles de Gaulle Airport will this August welcome 111 airlines operating scheduled services. That is four more than at Frankfurt and eight more than at Rome Fiumicino.
Europe’s busiest airport, London Heathrow, is only seeing 88 airlines using its two runways in August.
http://www.anna.aero/2010/05/12/the-euro-annies/

With the cancelation of the third runway thanks to the new Conservative / Liberal Democrat coalition government, could Heathrow lose out to its European competitors?
Let’s discuss.

29 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlinetharanga From United States of America, joined Apr 2009, 1865 posts, RR: 1
Reply 1, posted (4 years 4 months 1 week 15 hours ago) and read 7244 times:

The number of airlines is fun trivia, but I'm not sure if it's directly important to a discussion of how competitive the hubs are.

Had no idea FCO received so many airlines.


User currently offlineatcsundevil From United States of America, joined Mar 2010, 1205 posts, RR: 2
Reply 2, posted (4 years 4 months 6 days 14 hours ago) and read 6482 times:

I think that trying to win the contest of having the most airlines is kinda like saying your...socks...are larger than everyone else, in my opinion. What brings more prestige to an airport is the airline(s) using said airport as a hub/headquarters (and even the prestige of the airline boosts the status of the airport, in some cases -- like LH at FRA), the route network, and the number of widebody aircraft/international service.

Ultimately FRA and CDG will always have something LHR and MAD will never have...good location...particularly FRA. Central Europe means it will attract nearly every European airline, thus attracting airlines from all over the world wanting to connect with that route network. FRA and CDG have the ability to accept smaller regional carriers that otherwise wouldn't make it into LHR because of slot restraints -- so they might otherwise be forced to serve nearby airports. FRA is also makes a good scissor hub, like AI...but apparently they're looking to move.

The number of airlines is not the important factor, it is the number of destinations and having an extensive route network -- not just serving the worldwide hubs, but also serving small and medium sized regional markets. Although less important, but still noteworthy, is the strong rail connection FRA has as well as easy access to the autobahn system. It does little for an airport to have four carriers serving the same destination, other than giving them some higher pax. numbers and a few more movements per annum. Certainly a diversity of airlines is important, but sticking your tongue out and saying "Ha! We have four more airlines than you now!" Well...that alone doesn't make your airport better than mine.


User currently offlineMozart From Luxembourg, joined Aug 2003, 2182 posts, RR: 13
Reply 3, posted (4 years 4 months 6 days 13 hours ago) and read 6404 times:

Fully agree with the last poster. CDG is good on connections to many parts of the world and of course has the edge when it comes to connections to West Africa.

Still shocking to see that 111 airlines choose to go to that sh**thole of an airport which systematically ranks among the worst in the world. One would hope that the presence of so many airlines incites ADP management to bring the place up to the standards that can be expected of a first world country.


User currently offlinevctony From United States of America, joined Aug 1999, 455 posts, RR: 0
Reply 4, posted (4 years 4 months 6 days 13 hours ago) and read 6381 times:

Quoting Mozart (Reply 3):
Fully agree with the last poster. CDG is good on connections to many parts of the world and of course has the edge when it comes to connections to West Africa.

Still shocking to see that 111 airlines choose to go to that sh**thole of an airport which systematically ranks among the worst in the world. One would hope that the presence of so many airlines incites ADP management to bring the place up to the standards that can be expected of a first world country.

If you want a nice airport, MAD is it. That new terminal there is simply gorgeous. The old one is also easy to use.


User currently offlineatcsundevil From United States of America, joined Mar 2010, 1205 posts, RR: 2
Reply 5, posted (4 years 4 months 6 days 13 hours ago) and read 6371 times:

Quoting Mozart (Reply 3):
Still shocking to see that 111 airlines choose to go to that sh**thole of an airport which systematically ranks among the worst in the world.

Love it! I really respect people that don't mess around and just say what needs to be said. You're absolutely correct, and to be completely honest, the airport is about 40 years out of date, not to mention the place just feels gross...not too unlike some parts of LHR.

FRA is one of my favorite airports because while it does have its ugly corners, they're constantly updating and trying to keep the place looking fresh. That absolutely cannot be said for CDG. Furthermore, traffic moves well at FRA, the staff all work hard with German efficiency, and I only have one horror story! I'll admit I am a bit biased to FRA, but it's hard not to be when it's a good looking airport, it operates efficiently, it has a top-class airline as its main tenant, and it is constantly changing to keep pace with the times. To me, you can't ask more from an airport or its management.


User currently offlineatcsundevil From United States of America, joined Mar 2010, 1205 posts, RR: 2
Reply 6, posted (4 years 4 months 6 days 13 hours ago) and read 6345 times:

Quoting vctony (Reply 4):
If you want a nice airport, MAD is it. That new terminal there is simply gorgeous. The old one is also easy to use.

I haven't been there, but from the pictures I've seen, I'll agree with you -- the new terminal is spectacular. I have heard some complaints about the disconnect with the other terminals and the confusion that can exist though. Like I said before, MAD can't stay on the same level as FRA or CDG in terms of service because of its location. It will always be lurking behind in that 4th place spot...maybe someday even passing LHR since they're apparently not expanding anytime soon...but they'll have a real mountain to overcome with FRA and CDG because they simply have a better proximity to the rest of Europe being so centralized -- particularly FRA. I do want to visit MAD at some point because the pictures of the new terminal really do look incredible.


User currently offlineAirGabon From Switzerland, joined Dec 2003, 884 posts, RR: 2
Reply 7, posted (4 years 4 months 6 days 12 hours ago) and read 6214 times:

Quoting vctony (Reply 4):
Still shocking to see that 111 airlines choose to go to that sh**thole of an airport which systematically ranks among the worst in the world.

I don't agree, Terminals 2F, 2E, 2C and 2G are new, very modern and efficient, used by Skyteam airlines (AF, DL, AM, KE, CZ, SU, AZ, KL, KQ, VN) + AI, JL, EK, GF, MK.


User currently offlineMozart From Luxembourg, joined Aug 2003, 2182 posts, RR: 13
Reply 8, posted (4 years 4 months 6 days 9 hours ago) and read 5970 times:

Quoting AirGabon (Reply 7):
I don't agree, Terminals 2F, 2E, 2C and 2G are new, very modern and efficient, used by Skyteam airlines (AF, DL, AM, KE, CZ, SU, AZ, KL, KQ, VN) + AI, JL, EK, GF, MK.

2F "modern and efficient": despite being relatively new the place already looks run down, the technical infrastructure (elevators, departure screens, etc) in a bad state. Very dirty. Security procedures are badly organized and take significantly longer than at top class airports. Plus add the problem of Schengen-to-Schengen transfers still requiring security checks in most cases, although not legally required. Baggage delivery is slow and unreliable. Staff not helpful.

2E: similar to 2F, just at an earlier stage of its falling-into-decay curve. And with the main pier of 2E first falling into pieces and killing several people before being rebuilt - that is not exactly a great reference, is it?

2C: you are joking. This is a very old and run down place, even more dirt and sorrier state of infrastructure. It wasn't constructed for a hub-and-spoke system, but that's no excuse for not cleaning it.

2G: that shed? This is a container with only the most frugal of infrastructure and facilities. Connected to the rest of the airport only by buses (why didn't they continue the monorail until 2G?).

Seriously, CDG suffers from the combined ills of a bad concept (partly - but only partly - explained by parts of it nto being designed in the times of hub-and-spoke), bad maintenance, and strike-infested staff.

I know people complain about LHR a lot, but there is one excuse that I accept for LHR, but not for CDG: cramped space. The cramped space at LHR makes things even more difficult, but CDG has plenty of space.


User currently offlineTYCOON From United States of America, joined Feb 2007, 394 posts, RR: 3
Reply 9, posted (4 years 4 months 6 days 8 hours ago) and read 5871 times:

Mozart has a deep problem with anything French.
I find 2E and 2F just fine, state of the art facilities and even 2C, though older, is easy to get through.
I have flown in and out of FRA a number of times, and I frankly dread the long walks... and I mean very long as well as some of the longest security lines I have ever come across.... much worse in both categories than CDG2....


User currently offlinelightsaber From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 13120 posts, RR: 100
Reply 10, posted (4 years 4 months 6 days 8 hours ago) and read 5864 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting annaaero (Thread starter):
could Heathrow lose out to its European competitors?

Since there will be little opportunity to expand Heathrow (excluding gauge), naturally growth will go to other hubs. Thus LHR will become less important in the global scheme of air-traffic.

But will AF/CDG improve itself to accept the over-flow? In particular, the business will have to be competed for. There is no free ride. I think that between code-shares and the natural growth in international service, AF has quite the opportunity for growth with LHR opting out.

Quoting tharanga (Reply 1):
The number of airlines is fun trivia, but I'm not sure if it's directly important to a discussion of how competitive the hubs are

Fun trivia. Nothing wrong on an aviation enthusiast site enjoying the trivia. It is like discussing Van Nuys has the most operations; not a defining statistic, but still very interesting. I find this bit of trivia interesting.

Quoting atcsundevil (Reply 2):
it is the number of destinations and having an extensive route network -- not just serving the worldwide hubs, but also serving small and medium sized regional markets.

   Well said.

Quoting Mozart (Reply 8):
Baggage delivery is slow and unreliable. Staff not helpful.

This is what I was alluding to. CDG will be competing against against hubs in AMS, FRA, DXB/JXB as well as 'point to point' routes opened up by the 787. So US airlines will be able to meet some fraction of the demand via overflights. It is possible that the next generation narrowbody, a re-engine or a new design, will be able to meet some of this over-fligth demand too. So AF and CDG will have to 'step up to the plate' to win the unmet demand. They can do it. But they must work on continually improving service as that is the nature of global competition.

Overall, this is a very interesting statistic. I wish CDG decades of strong growth.

Lightsaber



Societies that achieve a critical mass of ideas achieve self sustaining growth; others stagnate.
User currently offlinegolli From Iceland, joined May 2007, 150 posts, RR: 0
Reply 11, posted (4 years 4 months 6 days 7 hours ago) and read 5788 times:

Quoting annaaero (Thread starter):
That is four more than at Frankfurt and eight more than at Rome Fiumicino.

FCO    that must be a high charter vs schedule ratio, movements.

Quoting atcsundevil (Reply 2):

   Good and spot-on post.


Golli.



Vinnie Colaiuta rocks!!!!!!!!!!!!!
User currently offlineatcsundevil From United States of America, joined Mar 2010, 1205 posts, RR: 2
Reply 12, posted (4 years 4 months 6 days 1 hour ago) and read 5603 times:

Quoting TYCOON (Reply 9):
Mozart has a deep problem with anything French.

Yeah I kinda do too, but it's mainly because I've never had a good experience in France or with French. Things are too out of order, and given the fact my entire family is German and that I myself am proud to possess their famous trait of efficiency, I have to go for FRA.

FRA just does things on a whole different level. While the actual city in many ways lacks the importance of London or Paris, Fraport are truly five-star and Lufthansa helps FRA by rubbing off their quality on the airport. I have never waited longer than ten minutes for my bags, security and customs never have lines and they're very orderly and expeditious, and all means of transport to and from the airport (rental car, taxi, bus, S-bahn, regional trains, or long distance trains) are unmatched by any airport I've ever been to. Those are just a few of my reasons though  
Quoting lightsaber (Reply 10):
So AF and CDG will have to 'step up to the plate' to win the unmet demand. They can do it. But they must work on continually improving service as that is the nature of global competition.

I very much agree. The market exists, we all know this. However, the airport needs better management, extensive remodeling, and teach some of the people who work there how to be nice! I think that if Fraport managed CDG, it would be hugely successful, pass LHR for the #1 spot in Europe and busiest international airport in the world, and would probably be well on their way to becoming the second largest airport in the world in terms of total pax. Better management and better infrastructure are really necessary for CDG to reap the same success as FRA. They better do this before LHR eventually gets their third runway and finishes with all of their terminal renovations! They only have about 20 years...

Quoting golli (Reply 11):
   Good and spot-on post.

Thank you    It's nice to have people agree with me on here instead of everyone just barking at everyone and telling everyone they're stupid! More importantly it's just nice to be part of threads that have fair discussion without mean comments towards each other.


User currently offlineMozart From Luxembourg, joined Aug 2003, 2182 posts, RR: 13
Reply 13, posted (4 years 4 months 6 days 1 hour ago) and read 5574 times:

Quoting TYCOON (Reply 9):
Mozart has a deep problem with anything French.

Chuckle... An easy way to discredit people who don't agree with one's own opinion - put it down to national likes/dislikes.

Well, you missed your shot, I am French, I love it here, I am absolutely fine with all French airports including the second Paris airport (Orly). As for CDG, I have written that it's a very good airport in terms of connections and leading connections to some parts of the world (West Africa). But I feel ashamed that our country has an airport which is a pigsty as the first impression to people coming to our country, where immigration counters are understaffed, security people seem more aggressive and even more stupid than elsewhere, which is not linked to the city centre by a fast, reliable and comfortable rail link (something like Heathrow Express - in Paris it's only RER with an approximate timetable, very frequent strikes, very uncomfortable especially with luggage, stopping at every corner in the slum suburbs, etc.), whose building infrastructure crumbles after only a few years or collapses altogether, which does not have the tools and the will to deal with a couple of snow flurries, and so on...

Quoting TYCOON (Reply 9):
I find 2E and 2F just fine, state of the art facilities and even 2C, though older, is easy to get through.
I have flown in and out of FRA a number of times, and I frankly dread the long walks... and I mean very long as well as some of the longest security lines I have ever come across.... much worse in both categories than CDG2....

Well if 2E, 2F and 2C is all that you've seen, you've seen the best of CDG (better than the rest, but still not great). 2B? Terminal 1? Terminal 3? Your opinion might change.

I agree with the long walks at FRA. But then let's see what we compare: when using FRA or CDG as origin/destination, CDG involves much less walking. When using FRA or CDG as a transfer point, CDG is widely recognized as being more cumbersome because of the transfers between terminals. Long distances, long waits for buses, frequent and mis-managed security controls.

Whatever, this is a discussion about the number of airlines and connections at CDG. I just had to inform you that one doesn't need to be anti-French to find CDG sub-par to other airports in Europe (like AMS or MAD), let alone in the rest of the world (HKG, SIN).

Coming back to the original topic: I did read somewhere that FRA was the one European airport with most nonstop/direct connections to other cities, and MUC was the airport with most connections to other European cities. Is that still true? Or has CDG leaped ahead in that category as well? I wouldn't be surprised, as CDG has a sizeable lowcost activity which opens connections to cities typically not served by legacies (which is the type of airline dominating at FRA).


User currently offlineatcsundevil From United States of America, joined Mar 2010, 1205 posts, RR: 2
Reply 14, posted (4 years 4 months 6 days ago) and read 5444 times:

Quoting Mozart (Reply 13):
I agree with the long walks at FRA.

Very true! However, it's very easy to figure out where one needs to go because (generally speaking) the signage is very easy to read. The walks can be long, particularly if you start out in the wrong departure hall and need to walk around looking for your airline to check-in, which can be confusing. It is unfortunate too that in some areas inside security lack many services (food, shopping, etc.). As for the walking though, it can be a bit of a hike but the moving walkways move things along pretty quickly and the tunnel in Terminal 1 (connecting A and B?) is really easy and very speedy.

Quoting Mozart (Reply 13):
I did read somewhere that FRA was the one European airport with most nonstop/direct connections to other cities, and MUC was the airport with most connections to other European cities.

Makes sense -- LH (and their 400 subsidiaries) do operate very extensive networks around Europe and around the world from both FRA and MUC. I'm excited to see what they'll do with SXF (planned to be BER, apparently) once the new Berlin airport is complete, particularly since Berlin is probably most lacking in air travel among all the major European cities. I think that if/when LH makes that a hub (probably along with AB), that may even start to rival MUC in terms of size. There is certainly much potential with that airport and could become a major player in the global market within the next 10 years...quite exciting!


User currently offlineRafabozzolla From Brazil, joined Apr 2000, 1229 posts, RR: 0
Reply 15, posted (4 years 4 months 5 days 20 hours ago) and read 5206 times:

Quoting atcsundevil (Reply 6):
I do want to visit MAD at some point because the pictures of the new terminal really do look incredible.

Not to forget the city itself. Madrid deserves a visit on its own right. It's a great city.


User currently offlineFlyAA757 From United States of America, joined Jun 1999, 1012 posts, RR: 0
Reply 16, posted (4 years 4 months 5 days 20 hours ago) and read 5203 times:

Anyone know what airport serves the most carriers? CDG? JFK?

User currently offlineMillwallSean From Singapore, joined Apr 2008, 1244 posts, RR: 6
Reply 17, posted (4 years 4 months 5 days 17 hours ago) and read 5014 times:

One thing I dont get, this was a site for spotters from the beginning. CDG comes out celebrating that they have the most diverse offering to spotters and on this board the same tired argument from the same people against the french gets in focus.

I have never in my life spotted but I don't see why anyone can be unhappy over an airport using diversity as PR.

I mean CDG as an airport has issues so has every other major international gateway I have been to. LHR, BKK, FRA, JFK, LAX, SIN (yeah terminal 2 isnt that fresh anymore and terminal 1 feels rather dated and for the last few years you haven't been able to reach the pool even)

But AF seems to do pretty good anyway (bought KL for example an airline that wanted to be a European player for some time) and Paris isnt exactly having problems attracting visitors nor the high end passengers so perhaps we should accept the fact that CDG isnt that much of a turnoff after all.
I like CDG for its atmosphere, its lounges, its also international in a way few airports are, I even like the dreaded old terminals. Nice architecture, in need of modernisation yeah, but most of the new parts are great.

And to me the more variation the more fun.
the more international destinations the more fun.



No One Likes Us - We Dont Care.
User currently offlineTYCOON From United States of America, joined Feb 2007, 394 posts, RR: 3
Reply 18, posted (4 years 4 months 5 days 17 hours ago) and read 4970 times:

I am not French, but I have been living in Paris for the past 20 years... so CDG is my home airport and I just find everyone's complaints about the airport to be overexaggerated.
The one thing that Mozart does mention which I agree with entirely is the poor rail transport into Paris itself... the RER is filthy and smelly. However, there is a direct one from the airport to Gare du Nord once every 15 or 20 minutes so I take that one instead of one that stops in the suburbs. But I understand they are building a new CDG Express line from Gare de l'Est directly to the airport.
And yes I have been to every terminal in CDG - a number of times. Terminal 3 is for charter and low-cost flights and it looks and serves the purpose.
But CDG2 is fine from my perspective... and with the roll out of the new terminals S2 and S3, in addition to the existing S1, I think we will see a whole different CDG in a very short time.
However, in my numerous travels through FRA, I find the lines much longer than at CDG (even the premier lines) and the people no friendlier nor meaner than CDG. I never have a problem with personnel at CDG (once I hurt my foot and was limping and a guy in a cart stopped and asked it I wanted a lift!).
I just like the openness feel to CDG, something FRA is lacking. And trust me a little fog or snow at FRA can screw up your connection plans... I unfortunately know from first hand. Not too mention the circling around the airport in the morning rush hour due to airport congestion... and hour's flight from CDG suddenly turns into an hour and a half, or two!!! Not as bad as LHR though. Something I've never experienced with CDG that seems better capable of handling the traffic with their four runways.
And LH vs AF? Give me AF any day... I have flown both airlines alot... intra-Europe and intercontinental and in all three classes...
I am flying to FRA on Thursday out on Friday... I guess I will be able to judge again.....


User currently offlineMANmatt From United Kingdom, joined Apr 2004, 969 posts, RR: 5
Reply 19, posted (4 years 4 months 5 days 16 hours ago) and read 4846 times:

Does anybody actually know which airlines is starting CDG to make it overtake FRA?

MM


User currently offlineViscount724 From Switzerland, joined Oct 2006, 25311 posts, RR: 22
Reply 20, posted (4 years 4 months 5 days 13 hours ago) and read 4635 times:

Quoting atcsundevil (Reply 12):
FRA just does things on a whole different level. While the actual city in many ways lacks the importance of London or Paris, Fraport are truly five-star and Lufthansa helps FRA by rubbing off their quality on the airport.

MUC, ZRH and AMS are much better than FRA in my opinion. I do my best to avoid FRA. It's better than LHR and CDG but I find it too crowded, confusing, and almost permanently under construction.

I went through CDG 4 times late last year (only because AF had the lowest fares) and had no problems. Apart from the actual terminal facilities, one advantage of CDG over LHR in my experience is that you rarely wind up in a holding pattern going around in circles for half an hour or so before landing, which seems to affect almost all my flights to LHR. That's one of the benefits of having 4 runways. That's also extremely rare at MUC/AMS/ZRH.


User currently offlineTalaier From Spain, joined May 2008, 490 posts, RR: 0
Reply 21, posted (4 years 4 months 5 days 12 hours ago) and read 4504 times:

I've connected in several intercontinental flights through both FRA and MUC, all on LH, and MUC was way better than FRA. Less crowded and a much more compact, better organised terminal. That said, I haven't found LH to be more efficient than any other airline I've flown on a connecting aspect.

LHR is a pain, although I acknolewdge it's partly to do with the fact that all BA/IB flights from MAD land on T3 and then you have to take the bus to T5 which usually means running to your boarding gate in at least one of the legs. Maybe intra-T5 connections are better, but for Spaniards it's a bit of a heck.

As to MAD, if you connect (especially from Schengen to non-Schengen) you will have to walk A LOT but nevertheless there is plenty of space and the transfers are comfortable.

I've never been in CDG, but I found ORY to be a nice airport, and at least for me the RER service combined with the Orly-Val proved to be very efficient and cheap. Certainly much better than the Heathrow Express, when you never know if it'll be under "maintenance works". And then there's of course the inflated 16 pound fare. Heathrow Connect is a bit better, but unless you live close to Paddington/Ealing it's worth taking the tube which itself is something reserved for those with plenty of time and patience (and of course you get closures during weekends).

If there's something London airports do terribly badly is connecting to the city centre. On that, almost every other major airport in Europe (with the possible exception of MXP) fare much better.


User currently offlineMozart From Luxembourg, joined Aug 2003, 2182 posts, RR: 13
Reply 22, posted (4 years 4 months 5 days 11 hours ago) and read 4371 times:

Quoting Viscount724 (Reply 20):
MUC, ZRH and AMS are much better than FRA in my opinion. I do my best to avoid FRA. It's better than LHR and CDG but I find it too crowded, confusing, and almost permanently under construction.

That is more or less how the rankings of "best European airports" typically go (where "best" is always voted by a different panel: passengers, industry bodies, etc): Munich or Zurich come out on top, Amsterdam, then it's places like Scandinavian airports, Madrid is somewhere in the middle, and so is Frankfurt. Paris CDG and London LHR always at the bottom.

There is of course some "penalty" with being big (longer distances, connecting more hasslesome), but as AMS, which is a huge airport with many flights, shows this can still be done in a pleasant way, in an efficient and clean terminal infrastructure, with passengers at the heart of the operation (not strikers). What annoys me at CDG is that things could easily be better, but too few people seem to care.

And from what I hear from airline pilots they also believe that CDG is a disaster. Even Air France pilots say that. But who knows, maybe they too have a problem with everything French


User currently offlineatcsundevil From United States of America, joined Mar 2010, 1205 posts, RR: 2
Reply 23, posted (4 years 4 months 4 days 22 hours ago) and read 4029 times:

Quoting Viscount724 (Reply 20):
MUC, ZRH and AMS are much better than FRA in my opinion. I do my best to avoid FRA. It's better than LHR and CDG but I find it too crowded, confusing, and almost permanently under construction.

I can't really argue, but I was mainly comparing FRA with the likes of LHR and CDG since they're the top three in Europe. MUC has the clear advantage for being planned and designed to be a 21st century airport. Airports like FRA are trying to keep with the times, which was a major point in my belief that Fraport does an excellent job. I will agree that ZRH and AMS are both great airports as well.

FRA has the same mindset for many people as ATL -- it's either you love it or hate it. I happen to love both. ATL always runs with such efficiency and is easy to get around, despite it having 6 (going on 7) terminals and being #1 in the world by a massive margin. People who hate it have usually had some awful experience and don't give it enough credit for the miracle they manage every day. FRA is similar in my mind...while MUC is much less of a headache, FRA handles more traffic and many more heavy aircraft and was not planned for modern aircraft, but instead has been constantly developed around modern aircraft to keep with the times. LHR and CDG have clearly failed in many ways in these respects. To an extent, I'd argue that AMS could be inefficient because of the new Polderbaan being a 20 minute taxi from the terminals.

Quoting Talaier (Reply 21):
I've connected in several intercontinental flights through both FRA and MUC, all on LH, and MUC was way better than FRA. Less crowded and a much more compact, better organised terminal. That said, I haven't found LH to be more efficient than any other airline I've flown on a connecting aspect.

Same response as above -- I can't argue with you, but MUC was built as a modern airport. Airports like FRA, LHR, and CDG have had to become modern which is why I was really only comparing those, while saying that of the three (being the three largest in Europe), FRA is the only one who has not only become modern, but excelled at it. LHR had help with T5 and now its other renovations, but only two runways and the recent rejection of a third by the conservative/lib-dems is a major setback. CDG, in my opinion, has made little effort and is still 20 years or more behind.


User currently offlinePKRJ From Brazil, joined May 2010, 23 posts, RR: 0
Reply 24, posted (4 years 4 months 4 days 19 hours ago) and read 3783 times:

Quoting annaaero (Thread starter):
With the cancelation of the third runway thanks to the new Conservative / Liberal Democrat coalition government, could Heathrow lose out to its European competitors?

I don't think that it is so relevant, since LHR has been already the busiest airport by international traffic in the world (I think) still without the extra runway.

In fact, the number of airlines isn't also important. Because if you have 500 airlines and each of them with one flight but you have 100 each of them with 10 flights this one still has more flights although it has less airlines.


25 Burkhard : Congrats to CDG. It clearly shows the visibility of that airport and that city to be attractive for foreign airlines. FRA still is limited until runwa
26 Viscount724 : Rarely more than 15 minutes in my experience, and when you do reach that runway there's usually no delay to take off. At many U.S. airports (and LHR)
27 Post contains images atcsundevil : Very true. I've done quite a lot of sim training for tower and TRACON at PHX (my major in college is Air Traffic Management) and the major problem we
28 Burkhard : I don't see these as a problem, the bus tour to the aircraft I and most passengers enjoy, would miss the smell, and boarding through busses and both
29 Viscount724 : I don't and I doubt many passengers do. Having to take a bus to/from the aircraft just means one more occasion where you have to line up and then wai
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Charles De Gaulle Airport posted Sun Apr 1 2001 23:52:27 by ContinentalEWR
Two Aircraft Collide At Charles De Gaulle Airport posted Thu May 25 2000 09:42:42 by Starship
Spotting At Charles DE Gaulle Paris posted Sat Feb 20 2010 12:07:10 by FEDEX35
A380 First Landing At De Gaulle Airport [video] posted Fri Jun 1 2007 13:29:43 by FlyATRs
Question: París Charles De Gaulle To Orly posted Thu Oct 26 2006 02:07:15 by Asturias
The Ghost Of Charles-de-Gaulle posted Fri Jun 23 2006 16:26:30 by Btriple7
To Get From Orly To Charles De Gaulle posted Wed Jul 6 2005 21:09:41 by FJWH
Santiago De Compostela Airport posted Wed Aug 18 2004 17:46:57 by AlitaliaMD11
Was Baghdad Airport Ever Used As A Stopover Point? posted Mon Apr 1 2002 02:41:51 by AdamHarvard
Is Orly Or Charles De Gaule Bigger posted Mon Oct 30 2000 16:30:06 by Sushka