No security check connecting from arriving at T2E L to T2F?

Old Jan 5, 2023, 6:21 am
  #1  
Original Poster
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: NUE
Programs: *G (TK elite+), OW sapphire (QR), ST elite plus (AF). LA black
Posts: 3,493
Question No security check connecting from arriving at T2E L to T2F?

I was quite surprised that arriving from SIN in Terminal 2E-L and connecting to T2G we did not have to go through a security control. Are flights arriving on T2E-L exempt from security controls for connection passengers?
I remember arriving in T2E-K gates from LHR connecting in T2G and we had to pass security.
f0zzyNUE is offline  
Old Jan 5, 2023, 6:30 am
  #2  
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: FRA/SXB
Programs: FB Gold
Posts: 1,808
Your experience seems to be another example of CDG quietly introducing a method of separating "clean country arrivals" to avoid an extra security contrle, as mentioned in the FAQ Paris CDG thread.
f0zzyNUE likes this.
mlin32 is offline  
Old Jan 5, 2023, 7:32 am
  #3  
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: France
Programs: FB Plat for Life, UAMP, BAEC, Accor ALL Platinum, Marriott silver, Hilton, Meli silver.
Posts: 3,090
Originally Posted by mlin32
Your experience seems to be another example of CDG quietly introducing a method of separating "clean country arrivals" to avoid an extra security contrle, as mentioned in the FAQ Paris CDG thread.
With three international piers in 2E, it should not have required a lot of forward thinking to imagine that one of them could have been assigned to arrivals from "clean countries" at the time of conception, should it?

But ADP being ADP, they are just starting to try and implement it, with all expected hiccups arising for unplanned moves...

Let's look at it on the bright side : this is an improvement we can rejoice about...
f0zzyNUE likes this.
carnarvon is online now  
Old Jan 5, 2023, 11:22 am
  #4  
 
Join Date: Nov 2021
Programs: FB
Posts: 177
I saw that last week as well (2E-L to 2F without security), and it made me pretty happy.
f0zzyNUE and Maestro Ramen like this.
BubbaX is offline  
Old Jan 5, 2023, 12:29 pm
  #5  
FlyerTalk Evangelist, Ambassador, British Airways Executive Club
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Somewhere between 0 and 13,000 metres high
Programs: AF/KL Life Plat, BA GfL+CCR, Aclub Plat, Hilton Diam, Marriott Gold, blablablah, etc
Posts: 30,126
Well, if that's the case, that's definitely great news!
orbitmic is offline  
Old Jan 5, 2023, 1:04 pm
  #6  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: London, UK and Southern France
Posts: 18,306
And if that means that they move UK flights to 2L instead of 2K, that would be even better news.
NickB is offline  
Old Jan 7, 2023, 4:55 am
  #7  
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Programs: Eurostar Carte Blanche, SBB-CFF-FFS GA-AG, SNCF Grand Voyageur LeClub
Posts: 7,819
Finally!

Although it is obviously imperfect. If an origin is safe the it is safe irrespective of where passengers fly to afterwards. For instance, landing from Chicago and continuing from 2F > no security control. Landing from Chicago continuing on any flight leaving from 2E or 2G > security control. No logic.

I think ADP should have used the lockdown period to make the necessary arrangements.
San Gottardo is offline  
Old Jan 7, 2023, 5:10 am
  #8  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: London, UK and Southern France
Posts: 18,306
Originally Posted by San Gottardo
Finally!

Although it is obviously imperfect. If an origin is safe the it is safe irrespective of where passengers fly to afterwards. For instance, landing from Chicago and continuing from 2F > no security control. Landing from Chicago continuing on any flight leaving from 2E or 2G > security control. No logic.

I think ADP should have used the lockdown period to make the necessary arrangements.
There is more than a grain of wisdom in "le mieux est l'ennemi du bien." Yes, this is imperfect and will offend those looking for perfect logic where absolutely every case has been thought of and provided for. Personally, I much prefer an imperfect system now than a perfect one in 70 years time or, even more likely, never. So, let us take our win here.
NickB is offline  
Old Jan 7, 2023, 6:05 am
  #9  
Original Poster
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: NUE
Programs: *G (TK elite+), OW sapphire (QR), ST elite plus (AF). LA black
Posts: 3,493
Originally Posted by San Gottardo
landing from Chicago and continuing from 2F > no security control. Landing from Chicago continuing on any flight leaving from 2E or 2G > security control. No logic.
how is that? when you can get to 2F without security control you can also continue to 2G without security control or go back to the 2E gates from 2F without security control.
f0zzyNUE is offline  
Old Jan 7, 2023, 9:04 am
  #10  
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Programs: Eurostar Carte Blanche, SBB-CFF-FFS GA-AG, SNCF Grand Voyageur LeClub
Posts: 7,819
Originally Posted by f0zzyNUE
how is that? when you can get to 2F without security control you can also continue to 2G without security control or go back to the 2E gates from 2F without security control.
Not sure security will let you through, they usually only allow access to the terminal passengers depart from. But who knows, maybe they changed that as well at least to allow these type of connections.

And for connecting to 2E gates via 2F: I think the current layout means that one would have to enter the Schengen space once when entering 2F and then exit it again when passing 2F>2E. That will not work for those passengers that do not have the passports/visa to enter the Schengen space.
f0zzyNUE likes this.
San Gottardo is offline  
Old Jan 7, 2023, 9:07 am
  #11  
Original Poster
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: NUE
Programs: *G (TK elite+), OW sapphire (QR), ST elite plus (AF). LA black
Posts: 3,493
Originally Posted by San Gottardo
Not sure security will let you through, they usually only allow access to the terminal passengers depart from. But who knows, maybe they changed that as well at least to allow these type of connections.

And for connecting to 2E gates via 2F: I think the current layout means that one would have to enter the Schengen space once when entering 2F and then exit it again when passing 2F>2E. That will not work for those passengers that do not have the passports/visa to enter the Schengen space.
at least when you need to connect in T2G you have to enter T2F where the airside bus departs. but good point. I forgot that the security staff checks the boarding pass.
f0zzyNUE is offline  
Old Jan 7, 2023, 10:18 am
  #12  
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: FRA/SXB
Programs: FB Gold
Posts: 1,808
Originally Posted by San Gottardo
Not sure security will let you through, they usually only allow access to the terminal passengers depart from. But who knows, maybe they changed that as well at least to allow these type of connections.

And for connecting to 2E gates via 2F: I think the current layout means that one would have to enter the Schengen space once when entering 2F and then exit it again when passing 2F>2E. That will not work for those passengers that do not have the passports/visa to enter the Schengen space.
I believe 2G services only destinations within the espace Schengen.

Ever since Covid, there's been no direct 2E - 2G correspondance possible (they ditched the PAF at 2G), have to process thru 2F.
mlin32 is offline  
Old Jan 9, 2023, 3:06 am
  #13  
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Boston, MA, USA
Programs: FB LTPE, BAEC GGL, EK Blue, SK Gold, Marriott Amb+LTT, IHG Diamond Amb, Accorhotels Silver
Posts: 1,900
That's excellent news that, at least, they are trying to do something. Would be great if they implemented it for London too.
San Gottardo likes this.
olivedel is offline  
Old Jan 9, 2023, 10:21 am
  #14  
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Programs: Eurostar Carte Blanche, SBB-CFF-FFS GA-AG, SNCF Grand Voyageur LeClub
Posts: 7,819
Originally Posted by NickB
There is more than a grain of wisdom in "le mieux est l'ennemi du bien." Yes, this is imperfect and will offend those looking for perfect logic where absolutely every case has been thought of and provided for. Personally, I much prefer an imperfect system now than a perfect one in 70 years time or, even more likely, never. So, let us take our win here.
Of course I am grateful that this is being put in place. But saying bravo to the weakest pupil in the class does not mean that he is doing well, he is just less bad than before.

Hence: these moves at CDG are excellent news! But still behind others (AMS, Germany, Switzerland, Austria...), and pity they didn't use the time they had during the pandemic to make a bolder move and catch up.
San Gottardo is offline  
Old Jan 9, 2023, 11:33 am
  #15  
FlyerTalk Evangelist, Ambassador, British Airways Executive Club
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Somewhere between 0 and 13,000 metres high
Programs: AF/KL Life Plat, BA GfL+CCR, Aclub Plat, Hilton Diam, Marriott Gold, blablablah, etc
Posts: 30,126
Originally Posted by San Gottardo
Hence: these moves at CDG are excellent news! But still behind others (AMS, Germany, Switzerland, Austria...), and pity they didn't use the time they had during the pandemic to make a bolder move and catch up.
... but now ahead of MAD, FCO, etc. Maybe it's because I'm a natural pessimist, but I must say my line of thought is very much along the lines of NickB here. It is also the case that airport layouts vary basically every time, and that also means that solutions and how good they can be will vary too, especially as you need to caliber the area for "safe flights but non-Schengen" to a space more or less commensurate to their actual passengers and aircrafts' volume. You also need to allow transit to themselves (usually easy) but also both from non-Schengen + security rescreening and to Schengen (without security rescreening) whilst also maintaining a route from non-Schengen to Schengen with security rescreening from non-safe origins.

Some airports like AMS have a central area which means that you can put a single passport control point, for the whole transit flow, and a single security rescreening point - again for the whole transit flow - and those two needn't be in the same place, and you can even allocate proportions of non-Schengen gates to safe and unsafe quite granularly without much trouble thanks to the existing piers system. Great. At CDG, however, there is simply no equivalent so whilst there may well be a solution, I must admit that unfortunately I can't think of it as "obvious" just off the top of my mind.

I'd also suggest that even amongst the examples that you mention, it is far from the case that all are perfect systems. For instance, I admittedly haven't used FRA since covid so maybe they have found the Graal now, but before, it was the case that even for LH-LH connections, ability to transit from a safe non-Schengen flight without rescreening security was - as of early 2020 - not universal and depended on which gates you arrived at and went to which was a pain in the back! (in other words, I specifically had to re-clear security despite arriving from the US more than once at FRA including in February 2020). Again, maybe things have improved since, but even if that is the case, it only serves to illustrate that FRA certainly did not get it right from the start and if improvements occurred, it has literally been years after the system of non-rescreening from safe arrivals was first introduced and involved a lot more than simple common sense adaptation or will. By contrast, MUC was far more straightforward, but again, it is a very different layout from CDG. The very simplicity of its layout making the sequencing of passport and security transit points easy and efficient. CDG is a hugely messy design in comparison and ADP a generally poor operator so i don't really expect them to come up with miracles any time soon i'll admit!.
NickB likes this.

Last edited by orbitmic; Jan 9, 2023 at 11:59 pm
orbitmic is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Manage Preferences - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service -

This site is owned, operated, and maintained by MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Designated trademarks are the property of their respective owners.