MXP tra gli scali bocciati dai viaggiatori Skytrax


Mi sembra che ormai in questo forum godere delle disgrazie o degli inconvenienti dei vari aeroporti italiani sia diventato lo sport preferito.

Se siamo arrivati a questo punto, al punto in cui anzichè analizzare, valutare e proporre cose positive, si pensa solo a come denigrare "gli altri" vuol dire che ormai abbiamo esaurito la spinta propulsiva e propositiva che era alla base di questo forum.

Analizzare le negatività di un aeroporto per proporre soluzioni migliori è ben diverso che analizzarle per poter dimostrare che il "proprio" aeroporto è migliore. Cosi non si fa cultura aeronautica ma si scende nel bieco e tipico campanilismo italico.
 
Citazione:Messaggio inserito da TW 843

Citazione:Messaggio inserito da CTALIRQ

Ti sei "casualmente" dimenticato l'ultimo commento lasciato su Linate???
Ma caro Quirino, ti anticipo un commento che non tarderà ad arrivare: FATTENE UNA RAGIONE! [:308][:308]
Aho!!! Che combini?? Mi confondi con il mio nullafacente "collega"????

[:305][:305][:305]
 
Citazione:Messaggio inserito da AZ1774

Non è MXP a fare schifo, è un po tutto il nostro paese.

Ad ogni modo, ci saranno pochi negozi, ristoranti, i pavimenti saranno pure 'na ciofeca ecc ecc ma chi viaggia veramente e non bada agli orpelli vari, apprezzerà senza dubbio la sua comodità, poca strada da fare a differenza dei ben più blasonati aeroporti in giro per il mondo. Changi sarà pure un bell'aeroporto ma tutte le volte farmi 4 KM a piedi mi deprime, idem CDG,LHR e compagnia.

Poi se valutiamo un aeroporto in base ai divertimenti che offre, beh, è un altro discorso.

Ovvio che a Malpena non si debbano fare grandi scarpinate,non è nemmeno un quarto,forse il quarto del quarto,degli aeroporti che hai citato...per non parlare di confronti con aeroporti che teoricamente dovrebbero essere più piccoli tipo BCN,HAM,DUS,MRS,NCE,MAN,PMI ecc.
Beh se si vuole un piccolo aerporto,con 20 fingers e tutto il resto bus,va bene!Ma questo non sarà mai di certo un hub degno di questo nome.La gente dall'estero probabilte prima di atterrarci per transitarvi,pensa di trovare chissà che grande e bello aeroporto,vista lasua giovane età.

EDIT:tengo a precisare che sono per un hub AZ alla MXP,ma per struttere è totalmente inadeguato!
 
Citazione:Messaggio inserito da Admin

Mi sembra che ormai in questo forum godere delle disgrazie o degli inconvenienti dei vari aeroporti italiani sia diventato lo sport preferito.

Se siamo arrivati a questo punto, al punto in cui anzichè analizzare, valutare e proporre cose positive, si pensa solo a come denigrare "gli altri" vuol dire che ormai abbiamo esaurito la spinta propulsiva e propositiva che era alla base di questo forum.

Analizzare le negatività di un aeroporto per proporre soluzioni migliori è ben diverso che analizzarle per poter dimostrare che il "proprio" aeroporto è migliore. Cosi non si fa cultura aeronautica ma si scende nel bieco e tipico campanilismo italico.
Quoto il saggio Admin.
 
Citazione:Messaggio inserito da TG945

Logicamente alcuni commenti possono sembrare esagerati ma denigrare quelli che scrivono è peggiore: domandiamoci perchè non siamo al centro del sistema dell'aviazione civile comunitaria ed evitiamo di ricercare l'agevole risposta alle problematiche negli accordi bilaterali e nei politici. Questi aspetti sono parte del problema ma non la totalità. Leggendo i commenti su vari aeroporti italiani si incontrano inefficienze di ogni genere e non arreca sollievo pensare che altri aeroporti europei abbiano le loro belle carenze. La difesa a priori di Mxp, Fco etc. non serve a nulla. A cosa serve negare l'evidenza: che ci guadagniamo a dire che, ad esempio, ad FCO la consegna bagagli è fantastica quando invece è spesso disastrosa?
Il vittimismo di alcuni forumisti in merito a Mxp occulta ma non risolve i problemi. I commenti restano ed anche chi non è competente di aviazione usa l'aereo e la prossima volta sceglie Fra, Muc etc. anzichè FCO, MXP o qualunque altro aeroporto. Le esagerazioni di alcuni passeggeri esistono ma è plausibile pensare che tutti siano degli idioti?

Hai ragione, quello che io però contesto è che, a differenza di Lin e Fco, i commenti su MXP sono praticamente a senso unico ed è di questo che non mi capacito. Non si parla più di un aeroporto con problemi e aspetti da migliorare (ci mancherebbe), ma come una schifezza assoluta. A questo si aggiunga che alcuni dei commenti di italiani sono tra i più stroncanti, mentre chi commenta Linate magari cammina passando sopra ai barboni che dormono, compiacendosi di quanto questo aeroporto sia "piccolo ma funzionale".

Sono opinioni di viaggiatori ed ognuno è libero di dire come vuole, ma nel caso di Malpensa si pagano ancora i pregiudizi (tale Dennis Holdenried scrive "...Overall, one of the best airports in Europe- in spite of its reputation!"). La reputazione non è tutto, ma incide molto e su questo per MXP sì è lavorato molto più che con le ruspe (in negativo, naturalmente)
 
Citazione:Messaggio inserito da TG945

Logicamente alcuni commenti possono sembrare esagerati ma denigrare quelli che scrivono è peggiore: domandiamoci perchè non siamo al centro del sistema dell'aviazione civile comunitaria ed evitiamo di ricercare l'agevole risposta alle problematiche negli accordi bilaterali e nei politici. Questi aspetti sono parte del problema ma non la totalità. Leggendo i commenti su vari aeroporti italiani si incontrano inefficienze di ogni genere e non arreca sollievo pensare che altri aeroporti europei abbiano le loro belle carenze. La difesa a priori di Mxp, Fco etc. non serve a nulla. A cosa serve negare l'evidenza: che ci guadagniamo a dire che, ad esempio, ad FCO la consegna bagagli è fantastica quando invece è spesso disastrosa?
Il vittimismo di alcuni forumisti in merito a Mxp occulta ma non risolve i problemi. I commenti restano ed anche chi non è competente di aviazione usa l'aereo e la prossima volta sceglie Fra, Muc etc. anzichè FCO, MXP o qualunque altro aeroporto. Le esagerazioni di alcuni passeggeri esistono ma è plausibile pensare che tutti siano degli idioti?

Quoto in pieno!
 
@gateA1, guarda, io sono l'ultimo che può parlare di aeroporti e l'ultimo che difende il proprio orticello, me ne frega una sega di MXP contro FCO io l'aereo lo prendo dove c'è il volo, il 95% delle volte parto da MXP ma non lo considero il "mio aeroporto" come molti in questo forum, pure quelli di FCO che lo scrivono pure nella firma ma leggere certe corbellerie non mi piace. A MXP si cammina meno anche perchè è su due livelli, o no?
 
Citazione:Messaggio inserito da AZ1774

@gateA1, guarda, io sono l'ultimo che può parlare di aeroporti e l'ultimo che difende il proprio orticello, me ne frega una sega di MXP contro FCO io l'aereo lo prendo dove c'è il volo, il 95% delle volte parto da MXP ma non lo considero il "mio aeroporto" come molti in questo forum, pure quelli di FCO che lo scrivono pure nella firma ma leggere certe corbellerie non mi piace. A MXP si cammina meno anche perchè è su due livelli, o no?

Due livelli e a satelliti.
Ad AMS, considerato l'aeroporto per transiti per eccellenza (a mio avviso a torto), e' tutto su un livello e sviluppato orizzontalmente. Se arrivi al G e devi prendere la coincidenza al A, ti devi fare ALMENO 20 minuti a piedi, e bello spedito.
 
Citazione:Messaggio inserito da AZ1774

Non è MXP a fare schifo, è un po tutto il nostro paese.

Ad ogni modo, ci saranno pochi negozi, ristoranti, i pavimenti saranno pure 'na ciofeca ecc ecc ma chi viaggia veramente e non bada agli orpelli vari, apprezzerà senza dubbio la sua comodità, poca strada da fare a differenza dei ben più blasonati aeroporti in giro per il mondo. Changi sarà pure un bell'aeroporto ma tutte le volte farmi 4 KM a piedi mi deprime, idem CDG,LHR e compagnia.

Poi se valutiamo un aeroporto in base ai divertimenti che offre, beh, è un altro discorso.
Ti do pienamente ragione, ma la percezione negativa è data da una sequenza che ti induce a vedere solo l'obbobrio. Se vai a fare un bisogno veloce al Changi, il decoro del terminal lo ritrovi nei bagni e quando ne esci dirai che il bagno è pulito quanto il terminal, accentuando di conseguenza la ricerca di altre componenti positive del terminal stesso. Queste componenti vengono poi attivate in "benchmarking" quando sei confrontato con altri aeroporti.
 
Citazione:Messaggio inserito da frenchMXP
Tu che sei un anti malpensa convinto per il fatto che lavori con Tot� ed i suoi amici parlaci un p� delle bellezze presenti negli aeroporti a te cari quali FCO e BGY.....

e ti pareva che prima o poi in questa discussione qualcuno avrebbe tirato in causa FCO...[:301]
 
Citazione:Messaggio inserito da AZ1774

@gateA1, guarda, io sono l'ultimo che può parlare di aeroporti e l'ultimo che difende il proprio orticello, me ne frega una sega di MXP contro FCO io l'aereo lo prendo dove c'è il volo, il 95% delle volte parto da MXP ma non lo considero il "mio aeroporto" come molti in questo forum, pure quelli di FCO che lo scrivono pure nella firma ma leggere certe corbellerie non mi piace. A MXP si cammina meno anche perchè è su due livelli, o no?

A MXP si cammina meno perchè ci sono solo 20 fingers!
Non c'è un TR su MXP in cui non venga sottolineato che l'80% dei voli imbarca via bus.
Quindi la stragrande maggioranza dei pax si trova a sostare più tempo nelle aree dei gates remoti,e sappiamo tutti come sono.......
 
Citazione:Messaggio inserito da Globox
Ti do pienamente ragione, ma la percezione negativa è data da una sequenza che ti induce a vedere solo l'obbobrio. Se vai a fare un bisogno veloce al Changi, il decoro del terminal lo ritrovi nei bagni e quando ne esci dirai che il bagno è pulito quanto il terminal, accentuando di conseguenza la ricerca di altre componenti positive del terminal stesso. Queste componenti vengono poi attivate in "benchmarking" quando sei confrontato con altri aeroporti.

Probabilmente MXP rispecchia la situazione del nostro malandato paese.

Comunque, intavoliamo un discorso sui bagni del CDG? :D
 
Citazione:Messaggio inserito da sarrebal


Ad AMS, considerato l'aeroporto per transiti per eccellenza (a mio avviso a torto), e' tutto su un livello e sviluppato orizzontalmente. Se arrivi al G e devi prendere la coincidenza al A, ti devi fare ALMENO 20 minuti a piedi, e bello spedito.

Il paragone nn regge.AMS non ha il traffico di MXP.
E se MXP avesse il traffico di AMS sarebbe del tutto inadeguato.
Preferisco farmi di gran lunga 10 min di tapis roulant invece che imbarcarmi col bus,specie d'estate o se pergiunta piove.
 
Ecco cosa si dice su CDG:

Paris CDG Airport by I Mottram


1 April 2007 Customer Rating :

SOU-CDG-SOU same day travel. Paris CDG terminal 2F is a travesty. Architecturally interesting but a farce in all other respects. The arrivals is fairly smooth unless you are arriving on a prop plane in which case you will be bussed for 15 minutes to and from your plane after spending 20 minutes taxiing around the airport. Exit the arrivals area and the signage is so poor that it's hard to find the car rental locations. It's on the concourse between terminals 2E and 2F fwiw. However, arrivals is nothing compared to the abysmal experience that is departures. Kiosk check in works fine, unless you're flying AF in which case it won't accept any other FF card other than Flying Blue. Once airside the shops are limited although I don't consider that to be a problem. The biggest disappointment is the food available. Two pathetic fast food restaurants in the lower ground area which offer microwave meals and sandwiches which are of poor quality and grossly overpriced. I will avoid this airport in the future at all costs.



Paris CDG Airport by David Chown


20 March 2007 Customer Rating :

Terminals 2A to 2D at Paris CDG all meet in the centre, there are escalators and lifts as the passage is at basement level. Much quicker to walk than take the bus unless you have mobility problems. Terminal 2F is a good ten minutes walk though, past the rail station. 2A to 2D have an acute shortage of seating areas, even in the departure lounges it is a bit limited. The whole thing, less modern 2F, is dated, scruffy and crowded. But compared with Terminal 1, it's paradise!



Paris CDG Airport by Lois Holloway


20 March 2007 Customer Rating :

If you have to transfer from terminal 2D to 2E, allow LOTS of extra time. It's under construction. We missed a connecting flight a couple weeks ago. It's a long walk between the terminals, and they have extra-early boarding because you're taken on a long bus ride to the ariplane.



Paris CDG Airport by Bill Gustafson


20 March 2007 Customer Rating :

My wife and I will be transfering at CDG in April, arriving at terminal 2E on AF from Lisbon and departing 2E on Delta, with about 1hr 20 min connection time. I transferred at CDG a few years ago and almost missed my connection; as I recall the airport was confusing and chaotic. I'm trying to be prepared for the experience this time, and have read some comments that upon arrival from Lisbon we should go through immigration as though we were staying in France and then walk from 2d to 2e, as this procedure avoids one security line, although I guess there is one waiting at 2E. If anyone could tell me the fastest way (and procedure) to get from 2D to 2E it would be greatly appreciated. I do remember from my last experience that the buses should be avoided if possible.



Paris CDG Airport by Mats Genberg


7 March 2007 Customer Rating :

I have travelled through and to CDG a number of times during the last years. And one thing that is obvious is that French officials only go to places where they can fly AF or codeshare partners. If not - they would have to use T1. It is a disgrace! T2 on the other hand is the reason there is no national outcry over T1 - the french only ever see T2 and think that things are OK. It is quite decent actually. Last time we flew we (family of 4) came in late from CPH connecting to LAX via this temporary Terminal they use for high-security countries (US, Israel and Algeria) and the service was fantastic! Direct vans. Superb staff that joked with my kids etc. I will still rate it as poor, since T1 is so bad.



Paris CDG Airport by Paul Turner


28 February 2007 Customer Rating : n/a

From touching down from Birmingham to reaching the stand took 20 minutes. It required a further 15minutes to reach terminal 2f. Having read about security queues for transit passengers I left the terminal and walked to 2c. It took 10 minutes at a fast walk. Another 15 minutes and I was through security. The only potential problem was that out of three security desks, only one was open. On my return journey I decided to try the infamous bus transit from 2c to2f for comparison. Maybe I was just lucky but the bus took no more than 10 minutes and the security check about 5 minutes. Perhaps CDG have got the message at last?? The gate signage within 2f left me bemused. It took 15 minutes to find Gate 41. It is well hidden on the ground floor, not on the first floor as initially indicated.



CDG Airport by Kuhan Kandiah
26 January 2007

I always thought of CDG as a unique airport but when I actually got there, it was one of the most unfriendly and confusing airports I have been to. The terminal, although just next to us and a stone's throw away, took us an hour to get to. The ground crew at the terminal we landed on were so unfriendly and refused to answer us in English on where the UA counter was. They just spoke to us in sign language as if we were illiterate. After reaching the UA terminal, we discovered that some passengers on our MH flight were also taking UA to a different destination. But they took just 10 minutes to get there and not the hour we took like a merry go round stopping by to get directions from unfriendly people at the airport. The UA transit counter staff were very nice and friendly to us and thats about the only good thing I can say about CDG. CDG will not even be on my last choice of transit airports in the future.



Paris CDG Airport by Bernard Condon
19 January 2007

CDG terminal one is a disgrace. Dark, dreary and in very poor repair. The check in area is an impossible mess with queues snaking around corners with bags and carts blocking every turn. Just inside the security check the building has no proper facilities with very few shops and cafes etc. Once one goes further into the satellites then the opportunities decrease even further. No sparkling duty free shop or top fashion outlets and this is Paris after all! One shudders to think of a long delay in this desert. It provides the amenities one might expect in a regional airport in China. The lounge areas are hidden deep in the interior with no natural light and require long badly signposted journeys to locate. This building was a bold statement decades ago but it is now the architectural equivalent of the bouffant hairstyle - it reminds of an era style forgot.



Paris CDG Airport by Nick Biskinis
19 January 2007

How France, with a strong history of 'Les Grands Projets' and transport infrastructure development managed to conceive such a dismal airport devoid at every level of practicality is a mystery. The RER (suburban metro) station for CDG Terminal 1 is situated far away from the actual terminal necessitating a further bus journey, which is inconvenient for passengers. The Terminal 2 complex (in every sense of the word) was part of a grand design that went wrong. The Terminal is not one but a clusters of mini-terminals (called Halls in France) called 2A, 2B etc. Trouble is that with the exception of 2F they have limited gate capacity so that not many planes can use each 'Hall. Furthermore this means some of these Halls are situated far apart. The result is transferring within these terminals either requires a farirly long walk (and you cannot use the luggage trolleys beyond one of the mini-terminals) or else have to wait for one of the inter-terminal buses. Yet often the road is cluttered with traffic as cars/buses do not have enough space to park next to the terminal for dropping off passengers. So the inter-terminal buses themselves are often delayed. Paris CDG is trying to remedy this with a new inter-terminal railway - Roissyval - but that keeps being delayed (i notice that under the advert proclaiming an opening date of 'August 2006 someone wrote 'In God we trust'). Much of the Terminal 2 complex has dated badly and inside is cluttered. In some respects CDG Terminal 2 looks like a grandiose version of Heathrow, but with all the drawbacks of lack of space and concrete ambience. Terminal 2F is the only part of the airport that is genuinely well-designed and pleasant to use. Not surprising that Air France is trying to consolidate as many of its flights there as possible. Paris CDG is a mess, and you have to assume that the airport's growth is propelled by its one trump card which is large runway capacity. But long-term the poor organisation and lay-out of Paris CDG will harm Air France's obvious ambitions to be the leading transfer airline. Paris CDG could have been a great airport had it stuck to a more rational vision of unified Terminal buildings and properly situated transport hubs for rail and bus. You get the impression that somewhere along the way rationalism was jettisoned in favour of an over-amibitious vision that got lost in the concrete jungle. It is ironic that countries often have bad airports because they are obsessed with presenting the right image. What this means is that they forget the basics of an airport as mode of convenience and instead go for architectural excess that proves impractical down the line with compromises to fit the 'vision'. Instead airports should be kept as rational as possible and as convenient in lay-out. When this is established then you can embellish a terminal stylistically. Airports like Amsterdam, Munich, Athens prove the point. As Paris CDG will no doubt expand, you hope that when they build new terminals they learn from their mistakes. Errors in planning cannot be rubbed out, other than with a bulldozer.



Paris CDG Airport by J Rundo
20 December 2006

Nobody has mentioned what I find to be the worst thing about CDG: the poor lighting: I usually return home to Milan with a flight in the evening and I find it so miserable in the semi-darkness of CDG - let alone those "subterranean" cafés where everything is finished by 800pm.



Paris CDG Airport by J Bertani
27 November 2006

Frequently transiting in CDG I agree it is not passenger friendly place. Waiting in the landside can be very boring due to the non existence of shops there. Terminal 2ABCD are just not up to date to accommodate so many passengers and flights. As previously suggested, in order to avoid massive lines at the transit security desks, go out through immigration at the arrival and take a short walk to your terminal of departure. That will make your life easier especially at peak hours.



Paris CDG Airport by J Kemp
21 November 2006

Nothing is either easy or pleasant about CDG, regardless of the terminal you happen to be using. I am a frequent traveller based in Paris and have no choice but to use this facility, and I must say that amongst the major airhubs in the world, CDG is by any measure the worst. I have written my critique of this facility in these columns before, and 6 years on, if anything, things have gotten worse. Check-in, particularly in 2A/B/C/D is beyond chaotic, particularly at peak travel times. There is literally not enough room to queue, and getting through security on time is a virtual nightmare. There are no priority channels, and in any event there are too few channels, period. In the terminal itself, again regardless which one of the 7 terminals you may be in, seating is poor, toilets tend to be filthy and few in number, and restaurants and coffee shops definitely lacking. Staff tend to be unhelpful and unpleasant, and give the impression that they could not care less, whether they are selling a € 100 bottle of perfume or a packet of chewing gum. Obtaining information can be very challenging, and if you don't speak French, either buy a dictionary or pray. If you are connecting in CDG, forget the dictionary, just pray! If you can avoid CDG altogether, you'll be a happier person for doing so.



Paris CDG Airport by L Thiry
17 October 2006

I often travel between Detroit and Paris, and I always dread the time I must spend at CDG. Horrible is too kind of a word to describe this place. Way too busy, poorly organized, dirty are words that describe it well. Bathrooms tend to be dirty, and I have even experienced trying to wash my hands in a bathroom that had no functioning running water. Very inaccessible for elderly, physically challenged, or people travelling with small children. Deplaning is done with the antiquated staircase that hooks up to the plane. This is followed my a long, crowded, bumpy bus ride. The convenience of having the TGV station right inside the airport is a plus, but it too poses problems for those with mobility problems, or those simply burdened with luggage. There is limited elevator access down to the station level (I think there are only 4 elevators--not adequate during busy travel periods.). Your other choice is to take escalators. Not easy with several large bags. Last time I flew out of CDG they incorrectly posted the gate number for Detroit, then neglected to inform the passengers. We had to ask several people, and I think they changed our gate about 5 times before getting it correct. I don't know who designed this place, but they certainly neglected the architectural rule of form following function. The most unfunctional passenger unfriendly airport I've seen--unfortunately it's the only international airport in France, and it will continue to be an unpleasant part of my life.



Paris CDG Airport by Jochen Iwan
15 October 2006

I'm frequently using CDG as transit airport with AF for flights from Zurich to Asian destinations. I flew 5 times this year via CDG and 3 times my luggage went lost. Even I got the luggage back within 1-2 days later I cannot understand how this can be and how AF can offer to the customers flights with 1 hour transit time only, When you have to change the terminals, 2 hours would be the minimum time which is required to pass the overloaded security checks and to drive with the packed transit buses to your transit terminal. May be a useful hint to save time on transit at CDG: Instead of queuing at the sometimes impossible long lines at the security checks in the transit ways you can pass the immigration and after the arrival hall you go up to the departure hall where the queues are normally in an acceptable length.



Paris CDG Airport by Martin Thomsin
30 September 2006

The worst airport terminal (2B) I have ever visited. Signage is apalling, especially upon arrival where you haven't a clue where to go to find immigration. The RER is not sign-posted until you are practically at it and once you are there you can't buy a ticket at the machines with notes or non-French credit cards (you only find that out after queuing for 15 minutes.) You then join the enormous queue for the ticket-office. To check-in you have to pass through passport control first which could confuse many and I was refused entry without a hard copy of my e-ticket. Just what is the point of an e-ticket one wonders. And once you check in there are approx 10 seats for the entire travelling public, unless you go straight through to the departure lounge where there are no services. Total and utter chaos.



Paris CDG Airport by Jeremy Irwin-Singer
27 September 2006

We were unlucky enough to travel through this airport on our way to Madagascar. The flight in was fine, but that was where it ended. Designed in the '60s and '70s, it has these so called "Satellites" which contain the gates. This means walking distances are huge, signage is difficult to read, the building is damp and is littered with rubbish. The central circle of Terminal 1 has no room for expansion, so terminals 2 and 3 are miles away, by bus, which is infrequent and badly signed. We ended up going around our plane twice. We only found out after we came back that Terminal 2A is Terminal 2 Satellite A. This information would have been helpful, but was nowhere to be seen. On our way back, we missed our connection, due to the stupid busses. Again we travelled around our plane, and even saw it leave. There were no toilets anywhere; one couple with their infant son were forced to let him pea in a flower pot, because there were no toilets in the departure gates! Finding a restaurant was another problem, the food tasted foul, and was located miles away from where the departure gates were. Terminal 1 (I think) where the baggage reclaim is has stupid people movers which interweave each other to get around the central dome, with zero signposts, so we could not collect our baggage easily. We were relieved when we got back to Heathrow, as it was a thousand times better. Avoid at all costs.



Paris CDG Airport by Peter O'Brien
6 September 2006

CDG is under extensive renovation. You should give yourself at least 2 hours for connections. On a recent flight from PHL to Rome on AF with a connection in CDG we missed the connection. Problem is that we parked on the apron and were bused over to a transfer terminal and then reboarded another bus to our terminal. As you can imagine the unloading of full transatlantic flight takes time and the buses wait until they are filled to bursting point. Other than that the airport is clean and airy and I found the shops and amenities adequate.



Paris CDG Airport by Brian Murphy
26 August 2006

Recently flew a number of times during the month of August through Roissy CDG Terminal 2F. Thankfully the airport authorities appear at last to be addressing some of the shortcomings previously posted on this site. I was delighted to see that since August 1, 2006, smoking is now forbidden in the cafes downstairs in 2F airside. In addition, another recent addition is the placing of palm trees at the baggage arrivals area and just outside in the main arrivals area. This small touch has certainly taken the cold sting away from an otherwise dated and somewhat chilly terminal in atmosphere. Hopefully, the authorities will now continue to upgrade facilities in Terminal 2F and replace the tatty and old carpets and seat upholstery, which are a disgrace. One final comment for travellers in transit - if you are passing through security to gates F41-F46, from a connecting terminal prepare for a huge wait. The notice says 10 minutes - I spent closer to 30 minutes there yesterday, until such time as Air France took some initiative and called any passengers taking the Seoul and Dubai flights which were near final boarding and were able to fast-track them through a dedicated security line. Clearly, the airport needs to look carefully at this area of congestion.



Paris CDG Airport by Paul Browne
21 June 2006

Recently flew BA in and out of CDG T2B and was somewhat apprehensive given the comments made here and on other message boards. Nothing could have been further from the truth! We were at Baggage Claim within 2 mins of walking off the aircraft and 5 mins after that we were outside getting into the Shuttle. Very helpful BA staff in the Baggage area organised our transportation too. On our return, checked in very quickly using the check-in machines but despite it being the busiest time of the day there was only one security guard on duty with 4 other unmanned desks. This slowed us down a bit but we had a couple of hours to kill, unfortunately in a mediocre Business Class longe shared by BA and AF. All in all, our 2 experiences did not mirror the bad press we had read.
 
Citazione:Messaggio inserito da Admin

Analizzare le negatività di un aeroporto per proporre soluzioni migliori è ben diverso che analizzarle per poter dimostrare che il "proprio" aeroporto è migliore. Cosi non si fa cultura aeronautica ma si scende nel bieco e tipico campanilismo italico.

posso sfasciarmi le mani per applaudirti?
le risposte più sagge arrivano sempre da te. ma questa non è una novità, è una piacevole conferma.
grazie.
 
E i commenti su AMS:

Schiphol Airport by Daren Stubbs

12 April 2007 Customer Rating :

This was an excellent airport terminal only marred by the long journey from the terminal to the runway. It must have taken 15 minutes on the ground before we reached our runway. The terminal was excellent, loads of good shops, good eating places and staff were friendly, particularly at the security checks. I was spoilt for choice with food and their communal paying area for all restaurants means that you do not have to wait in queues once you have selected a meal and want to pay. Easily found an exchange desk and toilets clean and lots of them. Was on transfer so not sure how quick they handle luggage but mine did arrived at its destination. All in all a great airport only slightly marred by the long drive to the runway.



Schiphol Airport by Daniël Smit

20 March 2007 Customer Rating :

The H-pier (arranged for low-cost carriers) is a disaster to all arriving there. It's a very long walk (about 10 mns) to meet the first opportunity to visit any toilet! In case you're so unlucky to have your landing on 36/18 R ("Polderbaan") you must add 15 mns for a touristic cruise through real Dutch landscape! It's unfair to treat low-cost carriers and their passengers in that way. Mind you: all (high) airport charges count equally for both low-coast carriers as for regular main airlines like KLM. By the way: low-cost carrier Transavia (KLM daughter!) is allowed to use the convenient B & C piers!



Schiphol Airport by D Visser

26 February 2007 Customer Rating : n/a

With regards to the comment made by Z Stefan - I have to agree that the immigration desks are often understaffed. This is no fault of the airport but of the Dutch border patrol - it's called budget cutbacks. Please note that with regards to the security at the gates - that's a European law and the checking for liquids/fluids is something that was determined by Brussels, with the push from the US. It is frustrating, yes, but it's nothing compared to other European airports. My gripe is that there are far too few security areas at the gates, meaning that you stand in line a long time now-a-days just to get through security. That is indeed poorly organised. Other than that Amsterdam remains, in my point of view, one of the best airports in the world.



Schiphol Airport by Z Stefan
19 February 2007

Arrived around 10pm and only four immigration officers available. Absolutely enormous queue to get into the country even with EU passport. Poor, chaotic, very confusing signposting at the immigration desks. Staff pleasant. On the return similar situation with the passport control and than the best part! Security check just before the gate - so no chance taking a bottle of water with you! No vending machines, no warning. If you happen to pass the security and decide to wait at the gate you are stuck! I don’t understand absence of vending machines? Are they so hard to install? Or maybe Schipol runs a business venture with no frills airlines so I have to buy water!



Schiphol Airport by Jonas Willemsen
13 February 2007

I depart from and arrive at AMS at least once a month and find it to be an extremely pleasant airport. While it is a very large airport by any standard I have never found it to be too crowded. A great atmosphere, lovely shops and restaurants and clean facilities make Schiphol a pleasure to stay at. If it's your first time there you're in for a very relaxing experience.



Schiphol Airport by Jim Faulks
1 January 2007

Recently we got a KLM flight from London City to Schiphol. The flight was delayed and left us with some 10 minutes to catch the connecting KLM flight to Clermont-Ferrand. We rushed across the airport and caught the flight thinking that our booked through luggage would never make it. We were most agreeably surprised and delighted to find our luggage had come with us to Clermont. Full marks to Schiphol staff!



Schiphol Airport by Gavin Stewart
11 December 2006

Just transited through Schiphol and couldn't have been easier. Clean, slick design. Very relaxing, uniform and consistent layout and signage wherever you happen to be. More screens than any other airport. Each screen gives you a live "walk time" from the gates - this time value changes depending where you are in the airport (classy touch). Just get off your first flight, and wander over to the gate for your second, as easy as that. My only gripe is actual boarding. Schiphol waits until the boarding gate to scan hand luggage. No wonder they called boarding an hour before dep time! 300 pax taking belts off, laptops out etc., all at the gate. Big bus station style crush barriers to cope with the queue. Not quite so transit-friendly. Also, watch out, you'll have to surrender that bottle of water you just bought airside at your origin (caught me out). But staff good humoured, and also posted an extra guy to really work the line, checking pax for forbidden articles BEFORE they reached the scanner, if only more airports did that!



Schiphol Airport by R Meyer
5 November 2006

Heaven on Earth for travellers with a visual handicap. Good fonts one can read, with big capitals black on yellow. The high contrast solution! For the rest good, but as on every airport try to ask one of the employees, you'll never find and 'see' one. The integration airfield and trains is very good. One thing: Dutch people are blunt and not very polite. National habit! This concerns employees and fellow-travellers.



Schiphol Airport by Andrew Bristow
19 October 2006

I have been using Schipol for more than 20 years and it remains my transit airport of choice for Europe. I have recently started to use a Privium card to get through the Schengen passport control (which I need to do on almost every transit) and this has made the Schipol experience even better - reliable, no queue at passport control and a dedicated security lane (contrast with the UK's IRIS system which broke down the first time I tried to use it.)



Schiphol Airport by Anna Coleman
15 October 2006

Having arrived at Schipol airport on a TAP flight from Lisbon nearly 2 hours late we were already stressed out and counting on missing our connecting flight so it was with great surprise and pleasure that we were met off our flight by a charming airport staff lady with transport, who took us right to the boarding gate (passport control on the move!), just in time to catch our plane. We're not VIP's but were very grateful for the VIP treatment, and thankful we didn't have to walk what seemed like miles through the huge airport as we would never had made it on time. As far as we're concerned Schipol deserves 5 stars.



Schiphol Airport by Steve Ward
16 September 2006

Efficient and clean airport. EasyJet checkin desks and gates seem to be a long way away, so expect a long walk if using this airline. Taxi-ing times can be long. Otherwise good, with good shops and food outlets. However, final departure Gates are grim with very limited facilities.



Schiphol Airport by C Macdonald
30 July 2006

Having transited through Schiphol almost weekly for the past 5 years, it is still by far the best option from NCL (other options being LHR, CDG, BRU and DUS). My only real complaint now is the number of bus boarding flights and in particular the disgrace that is gate D6. It seems that most of the UK flights depart from one of its many doors; there are no facilities, it is the wrong side of security and it is woefully undersized. Still it's a whole lot better than Heathrow.



Schiphol Airport by Eric Simpson
24 July 2006

As a first time transfer passenger I initially I found Schiphol to be a little confusing, everyone seemed to be walking in the opposite direction to me! After orientating myself I found it very easy to locate departure gates and retail facilities. I was surprised to hear the vast majority of announcements in English and particularly having flown in from a “smoke free” Scotland to be advised that smoking was permitted in the various food courts and bar areas. The airport was busy and in some areas seating was at a premium. The staff I encountered were pleasant and helpful. I enjoyed the views of the apron The process of undertaking security screening at the gate seemed to work well. Returning through Schiphol was a similarly easy and pleasant experience and I would not hesitate to consider using it as an alternative transit point to Heathrow for future long haul flights.



Schiphol Airport by Ed Kaflinski
5 July 2006

You know you're at Schiphol when you spend more time taxiing than you spent in the air from London. However, Schiphol Airport ranks top on the list of airports I've visited. Excellent layout, (though sometimes one has to walk very far if the moving sidewalks aren't working) great shops, superb tarmac views and good signposting. There are some down sides though. On a recent flight from London it took me exactly 3 minutes to get from the plane, through immigration (Dutch passport) and to baggage reclaim. Despite my bags being priority checked it took 45 minutes to get them back. (the same amount of time spent in from pushback to landing). Maybe if I flew KLM this would be better as they have their 'own' dedicated terminal. Too bad such a bad airline is stationed at such a good airport.



Schiphol Airport by Andrew Baxter
24 June 2006

First time to Schipol and very impressive. Clean, spacious, efficient. Definitely one of the better airports.



Schiphol Airport by Moises Menendez
1 June 2006

Schiphol Airport is the best airport in Europe when it comes to comfort, shopping areas, friendly, and helpful people, clean, and very quiet. The people working at the airport were very cordial, friendly and helpful. At the end is the people that counts! I will return to Amsterdam again!



Schiphol Airport by Laurie Dalton
18 May 2006

One unique thing about this airport that I have greatly appreciated is the 2nd floor 'quiet' areas. I'm usually traveling to an unfrequented country (Georgia) and tend to have long layovers. Spending 8 or more hours at an airport that actually provides free, comfortable lounge chairs in a quiet, darkened area, is a godsend.
 
Citazione:Messaggio inserito da gateA1

Il paragone nn regge.AMS non ha il traffico di MXP.
E se MXP avesse il traffico di AMS sarebbe del tutto inadeguato.
Preferisco farmi di gran lunga 10 min di tapis roulant invece che imbarcarmi col bus,specie d'estate o se pergiunta piove.

Il paragone regge invece. Non si devono guardare solo i volumi (e allora che parliamo a fare di LIN?)
Preferisco allora mille volte FRA (che ha anche una quindicina di milioni di pax in piu') ad AMS per una coincidenza. Almeno hanno avuto l'accortezza di fare un tunnel-scorciatoia.
Ad AMS rischi seriamente di perdere la coincidenza se non sei un maratoneta.

E parlando di remoti...a CDG, magari saro' sfigato io, piu' della meta' delle volte ero remoto (specialmente in arrivo, devo dire).
 
Lo so benissimo che i commenti su AMS sono generalmente ottimi.
Mi sono sempre chiesto il perche'.
L'unica cosa che mi piace di AMS e' il sushi bar nella piazzetta a meta' terminal (subito dopo l'immigrazione).
 
Citazione:Messaggio inserito da lorenzocrew

posso sfasciarmi le mani per applaudirti?
le risposte più sagge arrivano sempre da te. ma questa non è una novità, è una piacevole conferma.
grazie.
Una risposta cosi da parte di una delle persone che stimi molto fa sicuramente piacere, ma la delusione per la piega che sta prendendo il forum rimane tutta.

Grazie.
 
Citazione:Messaggio inserito da sarrebal

Citazione:Messaggio inserito da gateA1

Il paragone nn regge.AMS non ha il traffico di MXP.
E se MXP avesse il traffico di AMS sarebbe del tutto inadeguato.
Preferisco farmi di gran lunga 10 min di tapis roulant invece che imbarcarmi col bus,specie d'estate o se pergiunta piove.

Il paragone regge invece. Non si devono guardare solo i volumi (e allora che parliamo a fare di LIN?)
Preferisco allora mille volte FRA (che ha anche una quindicina di milioni di pax in piu') ad AMS per una coincidenza. Almeno hanno avuto l'accortezza di fare un tunnel-scorciatoia.
Ad AMS rischi seriamente di perdere la coincidenza se non sei un maratoneta.

E parlando di remoti...a CDG, magari saro' sfigato io, piu' della meta' delle volte ero remoto (specialmente in arrivo, devo dire).

Si parla di LIN perchè si parla di MXP,ovviamente sappiamo tutti che è immancabile:D
Invece devi gardare proprio i volumi!!Che senso ha paragonare LHR con NCE per es.?Nessuno.
Non credo che continueresti a pensarla così se MXP avesse 50 milioni di pax ed una struttura adeguata al volume di psseggeri.

A CDG anche capita,ma in misura direi trascurabile,rispetto a MXP.Lì credo il problema sia dovuto al terminal che deve essere completato,quello che crollò.