How much layover needed at Europe airports?

[Zach1213]

Thanks- I had no idea there were nonstops between MEM and Europe! I rarely fly that alliance.

 

There are a heck of a lot of cargo flights too! ;)

[Zach1213]

I totally agree. Heathrow is not a bad as its reputation here on CC.

 

I go through LHR several times a year and have never encountered anything like the stories I read here on CC.

 

I've been through far worse airports - in 67 countries so far - and LHR is easy compared to some. At least the officials speak English, they're polite and they don't shout at you.

 

Of course, as with every airport, a lot depends on when your flight arrives. Land in the early morning, along with lots of other flights, and you are bound to experience some delays, as you would anywhere.

 

I've even been deported from Ho Chi Minh City (Saigon) airport - Vietnamese embassy's screw-up with my visa, not my fault. Armed guard escort back onto the plane I arrived on. Now, that was no fun! :eek:

 

Or not doing an ounce of homework and subsequently being shocked when you don't make your T3 to T5, AA to BA connection in 75 minutes.

[Grammyluvs]

You can check your luggage all the way through to Memphis.

 

A 2 1/2 hour layover in Amsterdam should be fine if your flight from Copenhagen is on time. At Schiphol, you go through security at your gate. You will clear passport control/immigration in Memphis on arrival back to the US.

 

OP - If you have a choice of European airports, I would chose Schiphol. It has interesting shops and as someone already noted, a small exhibit area from the Rijksmuseum.

 

Thanks that was just the info I need. Was sure hoping I didn't need to collect luggage in Amsterdam.

[6rugrats]

Thanks that was just the info I need. Was sure hoping I didn't need to collect luggage in Amsterdam.

I'm glad someone understands this thread.

[cruising cockroach]

I totally agree. Heathrow is not a bad as its reputation here on CC.

 

I go through LHR several times a year and have never encountered anything like the stories I read here on CC.

 

Though BAA (LHR operator) seems to have improved somewhat in the past few years, some of us have long memories of rather unpleasant transits (fortunately for me, it's only been a grand total of 3 same-day transits).

 

Here's a

, and

.

[Zach1213]

Though BAA (LHR operator) seems to have improved somewhat in the past few years, some of us have long memories of rather unpleasant transits (fortunately for me, it's only been a grand total of 3 same-day transits).

 

Here's a

, and

.

 

Things change. A few years ago, you could talk about your bad service in Continental or Northwest, but that wouldn't matter anymore. Same thing goes with airports. LHR, especially T5, is a decent airport in 2012.

[Petoonya]

Two additional considerations about connections in the USA vs in Europe:

 

1) Flights that are non-stop from the USA to European non-hub destinations are popular with the casual traveler. Thus, the higher demand may very well result in higher pricing. Venice is one significant example - the DL and US non-stops are in very high demand and you can see it in pricing vs a Euro-connect.

 

2) Flying into a Euro-hub gives you far more flexibility in case of irops. I would rather be going on a routing with multiple "backup" flights than putting everything into one basket.

 

Then again, the "non-stop premium" to me is close to nil, as I am quite comfortable with connections.

So I'm the lady who is doing the PDX-FCO, VCE-PDX. I was pretty much sold on doing the nonstop to AMS. But have thought a lot about what you are saying. PDX is a relatively puny airport and if that Delta flight goes, there is not the backup that other airports have. If it were you, would you do the nonstop to AMS, or do three legs with a stop in SFO or ATL? Or just say to h with it and leave an extra, extra day early (planned to arrive day prior)?

Thanks once again for your help.

[6rugrats]

So I'm the lady who is doing the PDX-FCO, VCE-PDX. I was pretty much sold on doing the nonstop to AMS. But have thought a lot about what you are saying. PDX is a relatively puny airport and if that Delta flight goes, there is not the backup that other airports have. If it were you, would you do the nonstop to AMS, or do three legs with a stop in SFO or ATL? Or just say to h with it and leave an extra, extra day early (planned to arrive day prior)?

Thanks once again for your help.

Why would you take a flight with three legs if you didn't have to? I would take the nonstop PDX-AMS. If there's a problem with your flight, they can always send you up to SEA which also has a nonstop to AMS.

 

Just don't fly in the day of your cruise; leave at least one day early.

[FlyerTalker]

From PDX, you have three "conceptual" choices in going to FCO:

 

1) Fly from PDX to a USA gateway, then non-stop to FCO.

 

2) Fly from PDX to a Euro-hub, then onward to FCO.

 

3) Fly from PDX to a USA gateway, then to a Euro-hub, then to FCO

 

Many people feel that they have to do #1. That going non-stop over the pond directly to the destination is "best", having any connections in the USA.

 

You are misconstruing what I posted into your situation. Take the PDX-AMS-FCO routing and be glad that KL has multiple flights out of AMS to Rome. If you run into a problem, (and we are talking "if")DL can send you via SEA or SFO or even YVR. I would have absolutely no problem with PDX-AMS-FCO....just be sure to have enough connection time in AMS, so you aren't rushed. AMS is a big airport, though very well signed and easy to navigate. Better signage than most airports in the USA. ;)

[Grumpy100]

We never had a problem in Heathrow?