Having flown into and out of all the major airports in Europe at least once if not several times I’m curious what your favorite and least favorite airport is and why. Mine is Zurich for its efficiency and aesthetic appeal.

Worst? Geneva has to be somewhere near the top. That place is hell on earth.

I agree with you on Zurich - love that airport.

Amsterdam for the sheer volume of traffic/pax is pretty impressive.

Munich is fantastic. I think it's probably among the best for connections.

As for the worst: Beauvais, hands down. Never again. Never, ever again.

best AMS
worst LGW

Dublin is super fast, other than Preclearance (at least with my experiences). If Russia counts, Vnukovo was also great. Quick security, super clean, and saw the Russian Gov planes as well as Rossiya 747s. The only thing disappointing about Vnukovo was that in one of the lounges the potato salad had too little potato and too much mayo. Amsterdam is also pretty nice. Riga is super efficient and got through security and outside-EU passport check was really fast. And clean.

Worst: Santorini, Rome, Barcelona, KBP

I have to say that BCN's Terminal 1 really, really impressed me. Then again, it was quite a long bus ride from there over to the public transit access via the admittedly dingy Terminal 2 facility..

vulindlela744 wrote:

Having flown into and out of all the major airports in Europe at least once if not several times I’m curious what your favorite and least favorite airport is and why. Mine is Zurich for its efficiency and aesthetic appeal.

I really like Zurich aesthetic-wise. However, efficiency was terrible when flying through there last summer. I dislike the need to take a train to the international terminal. Pre-clearance took a long time as well.

Manchester was my worst in recent years. Just awful in every sense. My favourite is probably Hamburg (though I am definitely biased, it was a second home for over four years) as I knew it so well and I really appreciate that it's not afraid to be an airport. It's not a shopping centre in disguise, there are actually windows with views of the apron and viewing decks etc.

Worst : Mykonos JMK

Of the limited European hubs I've visited

Best: AMS, OSL. Both were very efficient and user friendly. AMS has heaps of stuff for avgeeks, like the Fokker 100 on the observation deck.

Ok: CDG (T2F), LHR (T4)

Not so great: LHR (T3), KEF. Not a fan of the idea of keeping everyone in the common shopping area right until boarding.

Of the non hubs I liked BGO, modern, bright and plenty of space. Not so much TOS the main departures area felt very tight and crowded, and the section that Widerøe uses is very dated.

Best: AMS as many have already said. The staff have always been so friendly and they handle a massive crush of people very well. It's not the prettiest airport but very efficient in terminal, which makes up for having to do the 20 minute+ taxi to the Polderbaan on some flights!

Worst: It's Stansted. Nothing like an airport that is out of the way and makes you feel like cattle being herded. Not to mention the staff seem to always be in terrible moods and barking orders. Truly a miserable place. Luton is not too far off, but it's saved by being a quick from King's Cross and that it has a few decent places to grab a drink before a flight.

Best: Zürich, Brussels and Munich.
Good: Prague, Oslo, Düsseldorf, Warsaw.
Mediocre: Amsterdam, CDG, Frankfurt, Copenhagen, Fiumicino, Athens.
Bad: Gatwick, Manchester, Dublin, Sheremetyevo, Linate, Vienna, Bucharest.

Don't understand the love for Amsterdam. Crowded, tired looking terminals. Way too many lost bags.

Best I've been to is MUC with nothing comparable. Spacious, clean, highly efficient and easy place to connect. Worst I've been to is CDG (opposite of MUC), although there are many airports especially in Eastern Europe I've never been to that might be worse).

VSMUT wrote:

Best: Zürich, Brussels and Munich.
Good: Prague, Oslo, Düsseldorf, Warsaw.
Mediocre: Amsterdam, CDG, Frankfurt, Copenhagen, Fiumicino, Athens.
Bad: Gatwick, Manchester, Dublin, Sheremetyevo, Linate, Vienna, Bucharest.

Don't understand the love for Amsterdam. Crowded, tired looking terminals. Way too many lost bags.

I buy the others, but what on earth is good about Warsaw and Prague? Prague in my experience has been full of surly workers with limited dining options and a tired looking terminal. Likewise, connecting in Warsaw, admittedly only done once 7 or 8 years ago, was difficult (long waits), the terminal was very crowded with not enough seating, and the staff were very unhelpful...also tired looking as I recall.

AeroLogical wrote:

I buy the others, but what on earth is good about Warsaw and Prague? Prague in my experience has been full of surly workers with limited dining options and a tired looking terminal. Likewise, connecting in Warsaw, admittedly only done once 7 or 8 years ago, was difficult (long waits), the terminal was very crowded with not enough seating, and the staff were very unhelpful...also tired looking as I recall.

Fast, efficient, clean, modern looking. Good outside views of the airplanes. Definitely didn't feel crowded when I passed through. Walks were on the long side coming from a non-schengen destination, but that's about it. You get longer walks in Frankfurt and Amsterdam.

VSMUT wrote:

AeroLogical wrote:

I buy the others, but what on earth is good about Warsaw and Prague? Prague in my experience has been full of surly workers with limited dining options and a tired looking terminal. Likewise, connecting in Warsaw, admittedly only done once 7 or 8 years ago, was difficult (long waits), the terminal was very crowded with not enough seating, and the staff were very unhelpful...also tired looking as I recall.

Fast, efficient, clean, modern looking. Good outside views of the airplanes. Definitely didn't feel crowded when I passed through. Walks were on the long side coming from a non-schengen destination, but that's about it. You get longer walks in Frankfurt and Amsterdam.

Fair enough! Though I disagree on Prague looking modern--there were some good airplane views.

Best: AMS, CPH, MUC, OSL, ZRH

Also good: ARN, BRU, FRA, MAD, VIE

Mediocre: BCN, DUB, DUS, LIS, ORY, PRG, MXP

Bad: ATH, BUD, FCO, GVA, LGW, MAN

Worst: CDG, LHR

BUD I agree is mediocre. Honestly I like the tiny airports, low expectations and few enough passengers that things usually go pretty well!

Best big: MUC
Worst big: FRA/CDG/LHR

Best medium: ZRH/CPH
Worst medium: STN/CRL

Best small: BLL
Worst small: TIA/KBP/TMS

Best overall airport: NUE. Small, efficient, friendly, short ways, short taxi times. It's my home airport and I just enjoy flying from there. My record was seven minutes from entering the airport to entering the airplane (and yes, I did travel without luggage). My best experience though was last year, when I had two flights in three days. During boarding, the lady at the counter greeted me with "You have been here the day before yesterday, right? Welcome back!".

Besides, I love MUC and ZRH, which are in my opinion the only huge airports, which are somewhere near the level of airports like HND, SIN or KUL.

For the worst: In the past I would say the worst is CDG. And terminal 2 is still the worst piece of garbage in Europe for me. But as I had some flights via terminal 1 last year, I have to admit, that it is pretty good and unexpectedly efficient.
So today I'd say it is STN. No fun traveling either from or to STN.

conaly wrote:

For the worst: In the past I would say the worst is CDG. And terminal 2 is still the worst piece of garbage in Europe for me.

But which part of terminal 2?

My favorite major airport is definitely MUC. However, if I had to choose one decently sized airport in all of Europe, it would be Rotterdam/RTM.

Best: MUC, ZRH
Worst: LGW, MAN

I'm also going to give a controversial negative call out on VIE. How many times do you go up and down the escalators and stairs in that place??? Not well laid out IMO.

We are of course talking 'proper' airports, not places like BOJ where you have to sit on concrete at 3 in the morning.

I'm glad to see MUC at the top of many people's lists. I have been there before, but only terminating a flight. Next month I have a connection there from EU to US. 2 hour layover. I think FRA is easy to connect at, so hoping to be pleased with MUC.

I agree with the MUC lovers. My favorite!

At ZRH I totally dislike the bus gates in the ground floor. Toilets are a mess and it’s awfully crowded down there. Otherwise it’s okay. The business lounge is superb.

FRA is getting better. At least that’s what I feel. Try the Panorama lounge - a very nice place food wise and for spotting.

OSL was nice as well.

I’d like to add CPH. Nice airport, easy for connecting flights. You can spend some time there without getting bored too much. HEL, for example, is a place you easily get bored at.

GVA, yeah, super nice views at landing and takeoff but the airport is a mess, especially at security.

At HAM the business lounge is not nice. The airport itself is okay because it never gets really crowded.

AMS: I hate the constant “mind the gap” from the loudspeakers and I also find it old-fashioned. I avoid this place.

CDG: Several threads about this airport here. Personally, I don’t like it.

AeroLogical wrote:

I buy the others, but what on earth is good about Warsaw and Prague? Prague in my experience has been full of surly workers with limited dining options and a tired looking terminal. Likewise, connecting in Warsaw, admittedly only done once 7 or 8 years ago, was difficult (long waits), the terminal was very crowded with not enough seating, and the staff were very unhelpful...also tired looking as I recall.

Did you visit Prague recently? In my experience, it has improved quite a bit and recent renovations have improved seating and dining options. Both Warsaw and Prague have been growing quite a lot so are very different from just a few years ago.

mchei wrote:

AMS: I hate the constant “mind the gap” from the loudspeakers and I also find it old-fashioned. I avoid this place.

You mean "Mind your step".

For some reason as a small child I always thought they said "Mike Yourstev". It took me quite a few years to realize that they weren't calling the same Russian passenger every time I was at the airport....

Heathrow Terminal 5 is always a dream for me. High ceilings, good shopping, and decent views. Munich is another one of my favorites

FlyingHollander wrote:

mchei wrote:

AMS: I hate the constant “mind the gap” from the loudspeakers and I also find it old-fashioned. I avoid this place.

You mean "Mind your step".

For some reason as a small child I always thought they said "Mike Yourstev". It took me quite a few years to realize that they weren't calling the same Russian passenger every time I was at the airport....

You made me laugh real hard in the morning. Thanks for that

JakubH wrote:

AeroLogical wrote:

I buy the others, but what on earth is good about Warsaw and Prague? Prague in my experience has been full of surly workers with limited dining options and a tired looking terminal. Likewise, connecting in Warsaw, admittedly only done once 7 or 8 years ago, was difficult (long waits), the terminal was very crowded with not enough seating, and the staff were very unhelpful...also tired looking as I recall.

Did you visit Prague recently? In my experience, it has improved quite a bit and recent renovations have improved seating and dining options. Both Warsaw and Prague have been growing quite a lot so are very different from just a few years ago.

Warsaw I would believe as it has been several years now, but I was in Prague just three months ago. This is all personal opinion, but I found the passport control confusing with unclear signage. When flying out of the airport there was a lack of outlets and the airport seemed pretty dingy overall. It also had that unfortunate design where when you transit security you're locked into an area without food or drink options--this would not always be a problem but my flight was hit with a two hour delay after everyone had gone to the gate (this was in Terminal 1 I believe). I don't think Prague is the worst airport I've been through in Europe (Stansted by a mile), but I wouldn't call it good.

Jutlander wrote:

Best: AMS, CPH, MUC, OSL, ZRH

Also good: ARN, BRU, FRA, MAD, VIE

Mediocre: BCN, DUB, DUS, LIS, ORY, PRG, MXP

Bad: ATH, BUD, FCO, GVA, LGW, MAN

Worst: CDG, LHR

I agree on this one except for ARN i would put that to Bad because of the terminal layouts

Best: VIE
Worst: Berlin SFX and Berlin TXL

*Best for arrival: KIR, 50 seconds from airplane seat to airport entrance including immigration! Flying the other way is a disaster, takes nearly one hour to get thru security (1 by 1 processing).

GDG is the pits, and I don't mean T1.

Connecting with AF (main airline at CDG) from a Shengen Country to a long-haul (non-Shengen) Country is terrible.

I've flown CPH-CDG-DFW a few times in 2019, and I need at least 90 minutes (running) to transfer.

When I can fly KL CPH-AMS-IAH I get through Schiphol in 20-30 minutes tops, and also greeted by friendly staff.

Best: MUC
Worst: TXL

I know that there was little point in improving TXL considering the new airport, but at least clean the seats inside the gate area!

CPHFF wrote:

GDG is the pits, and I don't mean T1.

Connecting with AF (main airline at CDG) from a Shengen Country to a long-haul (non-Shengen) Country is terrible.

I've flown CPH-CDG-DFW a few times in 2019, and I need at least 90 minutes (running) to transfer.

When I can fly KL CPH-AMS-IAH I get through Schiphol in 20-30 minutes tops, and also greeted by friendly staff.

Granted I know the place inside out, but how on earth did you manage 90 minutes? I can connect from 2G to any other terminal 2 in no more than 30 minutes. The only time it take more is going from 2E to schengen, entirely because of the passport control.
That said, it is a bad layout for a hub and exceedingly boring to wait in. The place needs to be tied together with a central shopping and entertainment area. Something like Istanbul's central shopping area, plopped down between CDG 2E, F and L. The dimensions of the gap is almost the same as the central area of IST.

IAHWorldflyer wrote:

I'm glad to see MUC at the top of many people's lists. I have been there before, but only terminating a flight. Next month I have a connection there from EU to US. 2 hour layover. I think FRA is easy to connect at, so hoping to be pleased with MUC.

Agree, went through Munich and the process was easy. Helpful friendly staff everywhere, even the psssport control people were great.

NCE on the other hand is a dump of a place. I’ve been through there multiple times.

Also like Geneva, that is a superb airport to get through, super fast. Been through twice with no bother.

Best: OSL, TLL
Good: MAD (T4S)

Bad:
FRA - confusing to find your way and crowded
ZRH - Been there last summer: overrated, overcrowded, dated terminals and with hundreds of delayed flights. People embarking on concourse A were making lines that obstructed the corridors of the terminal. Also, the layout of the runways prevents an efficient flow of departures/arrivals: I never expected my flight to hold for several minutes before landing at this airport; in fact we held much longer to land in ZRH than in LHR.

Worst: FCO - overcrowded; this airport is the definition of confusion!

Airports are growing and expanding so that last year's status may not be valid, but I will second MUC. New HEL is also almost great, though still something left to do. I did like BCN and MAD.
Not so good include ARN, CDG, and LHR (partially) but the very worst airports I have been are in Russia.

Thought it would be hands down that the worst are the low cost airports like: Hahn, Beauvais, Bergamo, Ciampino, Luton

Many of them quite awful with limited amenities, long lines, limited transport options, etc.

Also, the Greek holiday resort airports seem to get terrible reviews

But is it maybe not fair to compare those to standard airports serving premium passengers?

YIMBY wrote:

Airports are growing and expanding so that last year's status may not be valid, but I will second MUC. New HEL is also almost great, though still something left to do. I did like BCN and MAD.
Not so good include ARN, CDG, and LHR (partially) but the very worst airports I have been are in Russia.

HEL is indeed a nice place. It is relaxed and it feels like a small airport with little traffic. During peak times, though, it can get quite crowded.

From my UK experience, worst: LTN, best: SEN.

alan3 wrote:

Thought it would be hands down that the worst are the low cost airports like: Hahn, Beauvais, Bergamo, Ciampino, Luton

Many of them quite awful with limited amenities, long lines, limited transport options, etc.

Also, the Greek holiday resort airports seem to get terrible reviews

But is it maybe not fair to compare those to standard airports serving premium passengers?

True, but we were talking large hub airports here. Not small regional ones.

Besides, some of those low-cost airports are actually pretty nice. They wouldn't win awards, but they're not as bad as you might expect them to be.

CDG was not so hot, AMS was great

Aesthetics-wise:
Definitely MAD for me (of course speaking of T4 / T4S)

While I don't want to say it's the worst, I found connecting in (and arriving at, if I'm entirely honest) LIS rather unpleasant.

danvs wrote:

ZRH - Been there last summer: overrated, overcrowded, dated terminals and with hundreds of delayed flights.

Hundreds of delayed flights? You mean all flights that day were delayed? How many departures ZRH has daily? Are you sure it weren't dozens of flights?

danvs wrote:

I never expected my flight to hold for several minutes before landing at this airport; in fact we held much longer to land in ZRH than in LHR.

Personal experiences may very greatly. I have experienced two holdings at ZRH, the last one just a week ago, both lasted for around five minutes. Coming in to land at LHR I also experienced two holdings, both lasting around twenty minutes.

Maybe you weren't lucky at ZRH. Personally I am always very happy when the crew announces we 'unfortunately' have to hold for some time. I love to go round in circles, watch the world from above and look at other aircraft nearby, that are also holding.

Some flights between Frankfurt and Amsterdam take 44 minutes, others last 58 minutes, thanks to holding during the approach to Schiphol Airport. I have done the 374 miles between AMS and ZRH in 53 minutes, while the 231 miles between AMS and LHR took 1 hour and 10 minutes, of which twenty minutes were spent holding. A great way to start the day!

Scarebus34 wrote:

Worst? Geneva has to be somewhere near the top. That place is hell on earth.

cpd wrote:

Also like Geneva, that is a superb airport to get through, super fast. Been through twice with no bother.

MartijnNL wrote:

Scarebus34 wrote:

Worst? Geneva has to be somewhere near the top. That place is hell on earth.

cpd wrote:

Also like Geneva, that is a superb airport to get through, super fast. Been through twice with no bother.

I like that I get through there really fast and out. I don't stay in Geneva though, I just transit through there and head off into France. Every time I go through there it has never been a problem, just easy.

Bad: AMS

1. security checks: Long wait times at security (sometimes over 20 min is just unacceptable - it’s just poor planning or simply ignorance) combined with the rudest security staff in Europe who will punish you when you don’t give the right answer fast enough.

2 Nothing works. Power points only in central areas (i still don’t get it why they are not everywhere at airports) and then they don’t work, toilets dirty and smelly, elevators/escalators out of order or only in one working in one direction, flickering light bulbs

3. Noisy airport - announcements all the time including “mind your step” - really annoying and difficult when you need to make phone calls

4. Everything slightly tired looking and staff that are too Laisser-faire/slow/unresponsive/not service oriented

I believe that too much positive feedback has made management at AMS lazy.

Good: BCN, MAD, SEN, FRA, MUC.

mchei wrote:

YIMBY wrote:

Airports are growing and expanding so that last year's status may not be valid, but I will second MUC. New HEL is also almost great, though still something left to do. I did like BCN and MAD.
Not so good include ARN, CDG, and LHR (partially) but the very worst airports I have been are in Russia.

HEL is indeed a nice place. It is relaxed and it feels like a small airport with little traffic. During peak times, though, it can get quite crowded.

In HEL the non-Schengen part in T2 is new and shiny now, next step is the expansion of the Schengen part, which truly needs more space. T2 also gets a new entrance and new arrivals & departure halls, the project should be finished by end of 2022.