FlyingUnderTheRadar

A little sample. Now that SLC has a direct flight to CDG I have a dilemma.

1. Take the direct and spend 10.5 hours in the tin can, 2 hour layover, then take a euro flight to my destination (~1.5 hours).

2. Fly to ATL (3.5 hours) with a 1 hour layover and take a direct flight to my destination (9.5 hours).

Total airport time is the same but 1 hour more B.I.S. with option 2.

However, option 1 is well CDG and having to deal with immigration and navigating the airport. 2 hour layover though. Language is not a problem as I speak French.

Option 2 is ATL which is easy to navigate and customs and immigration is at my destination so I do not care if takes a bit of time. A small break between flights to stretch ones legs but not much.


So which is the better option? I have not been through CDG in a while as usually I fly into other cities directly. But it now a option.

DL-Don

Take the direct flight from ATL to your destination. Avoid CDG whenever possible.

vxmike

I have a greater supply of excess time than I do excess money thus I'm almost always willing to accrue excess SM via longer routings unless I absolutely must be somewhere quicker which for me is rare.

dgxoxo

for me, time is money. get me to my destination faster...

Sez_Who

You don't mention your final destination so why not take a look at the mileage of each and choose the one that gives you the most?

TheMadBrewer

For me the plane can push me one way or the other.

I used to fly LAX-MSP/DTW-AMS (in Y) rather than the non-stop KLM LAX-AMS, assuming the price was similar. I found the 333 over the water much superior to the 74M (before Economy Comfort) and the high probabilty of an upgrade on the the domestic legs was just gravy. The extra EQM/MQM didn't hurt either.

On the other hand, if timing is critical it usually pays to get to a European gateway (e.g. AMS/CDG) where there are lots of options (including trains) in the event of problems, rather than being stuck in the US where the flights are one a day (and booked for the next three days).

On the gripping hand ...

Marylou

If I could avoid CDG transfer (AKA clusterX), I would take 2 9 hour flights in the tin can.

AM-PM-DM

I usually consider three things.

1) Aircraft. I avoid 767s at all cost.
2) When do I arrive in EU? If I am already beat from the TATL and have a connection in EU, my patience can run thin if it is late in the day.
3) How long is the TATL? I prefer a long enough flight to (eat and) sleep for 7-8 hours. Makes the jet lag so much more bearable.

Consequently I prefer the SEA-AMS-FRA routing for my most common itn over the SEA-DTW/ATL-FRA. Eat, sleep 7 hours, and I do not mind the 1 hour flight in the early EU AM. The DTW/ATL flights would get me in a little earlier, but there is not enough time to get refreshing sleep (DTW) and/or utilized the abhorred 767 (ATL).

fti

The fallacy with that statement is that in reality, you probably are not earning money every hour you are awake. If so, then the question is "How much money did I lose by spending an extra hour of my time traveling?" For most people, little if any.

fti

I have a similar philosophy. Actually I enjoy a connection in Europe that allows me to take a shower and change clothes.

FlyingUnderTheRadar

Thanks for the thoughts. From the replies I guess the real question was doing the transfer at CDG. Sounds like about what I thought. Void if possible. The other question that was on my mind is that at least for my next trip is that I am going having baggage to deal with. I would rather deal with it once after checking it than twice. So given that CDG is a pain the luggage issue makes it clear go through ATL.

My usual route is SLC->JFK->NCE or FRA and for the most part I have had reasonable luck going through JFK. Probably because it is typically spring or fall.

fti

You shouldn't have to deal with checked luggage in CDG if that is only your connecting point. Your luggage gets checked to its final destination.

channa

What about arrival times? Doesn't the ATL-Euro flight get in earlier? If you want to hit the ground running, that may be better.

But the CDG-Euro flight may get in later. If you're not interested in running when you get there, and you'd like a higher likelihood that your hotel is ready, that may be better (also if it lets you leave later, that may be a bonus).

MSPeconomist

This is what I was thinking.

Also, I would avoid a connection in ATL to international (presumably once a day) with only one hour. This seems to be asking for problems.

FlyingUnderTheRadar

The baggage will be checked through but I am thinking about customs. I am assuming I will clear immigration and customs at CDG as my flight would be an EU flight. Which if like the US means collecting bags and rechecking. That is the hassle I am thinking of all within two hours.

Sounds odd but I guess what it comes down to is this the first time I have the opportunity to connect in France rather than do the connection in the US. So that is perspective I am looking for. Last time I did a transit was NRT and where I did not have to deal with immigration or customs. Which I was assuming would be the case at CDG as my onward flight would within the EU.


The ATL flight does get in earlier but it really does not matter for these purposes. And I can get an earlier flight ito ATL from SLC which gives 2.5 lay over which is fine (less baggage transfer worries) - more time for stretching my legs.