CDG -- why the bad rep?
Nov 3, 2006, 6:12 am
#46
Join Date: May 2004
Programs: BA blue, LH Senator, KQ (FB) gold
Posts: 8,215
Of the big hubs in Europe (LHR, FRA, AMS, CDG), I find CDG the worst, although I cannot completely pass judgment on as I have not yet used AMS (although many suggest that it is the best). But to call it one of the world's worst airports is a major overstatement.
If you haven't been in some developing world airports with crumbling infrastructure, poor lighting, massive crowds, no air conditioning, and incompetent staff, you just can't say this.
CDG 2 (I haven't been in CDG1) has light, food you can eat, bathrooms that were cleaned more than once in the past century, and some semblance of signs to help you.
If you haven't been in some developing world airports with crumbling infrastructure, poor lighting, massive crowds, no air conditioning, and incompetent staff, you just can't say this.
CDG 2 (I haven't been in CDG1) has light, food you can eat, bathrooms that were cleaned more than once in the past century, and some semblance of signs to help you.
Last edited by You want to go where?; Nov 6, 2006 at 6:13 am Reason: edited for clarification
Nov 4, 2006, 11:50 am
#47
Join Date: Feb 1999
Location: Denver CO
Posts: 3,682
Originally Posted by respectable_man
As a fellow canadian, I can sympathize with your opinion of YYZ, which for me ranks second from the bottom just ahead of CDG. In all fairness, I used to think YYZ was bad until I had to start travelling through CDG.
Most of the comments of this thread are true, but I can reinforce some in the following manner. I can state without hesitation that lack of multilingual-speaking staff at this international airport is compounded by a serious attitude problem with the staff pretty much everywhere and implicit attitude that you should speak French at all cost. French is my mother tongue, and I have no difficulty understanding the remarks of the staff at the airport. I mean, there is attitude and then there is Attitude!
I find it completely unacceptable to have french-only staff at the RER station. Gee! That's a no brainer that you should make sure you have ticket agents that can communicate with the persons transiting there. Have you ever withnessed a family of tired japanese tourists trying to buy an RER ticket from a ticket collector? Or Russians? Never mind the fact that the imbecile civil servant spoke miserable anything (including French!), she decided to take a 15minute break despite the fact she manned the only wicket open at that time! The attitude from the security agent checking the actual tickets was hardly better! Try asking him for help: "You need to ask at the wicket!". For cryin' out loud! this is an entry point for international travellers and all their f*****g signs are in French only! Then, the mecanical stairs don't work. This, of course, after the frustration of finding your way to the station following ill-placed and often confusing french-only signs (there is one for the shuttle that, if followed properly, will take you to a washroom.). Waiting for this shuttle is hardly better, with completely confusing signs: there were two "You are here" dots on the signpost, and no indication of the direction in which the shuttle (running a loop between terminal) was actually going.
It is hard enough to find luggage carts, you cannot take them in the elevators (which are themselves hard enough to find)! If that were not enough, there is clearly insufficient space at checkin so queues for various destinations and various airlines often get helplessly tangled. (In attempting to checkin for an AC flight to YYZ, I found myself in the queue for an AA flight to MIA.) The passport control officer (there is in my experience a single one unless you are travelling from the AF-terminal - whichever number it is) is not to be hurried by the long lineups of people impatiently waiting for their flights! Why should he bother? They are just tourists!
Have you ever boarded the RER with luggage? Why in Heaven's name did they not make the RER station platforms level with the train platforms? You're stuck hauling your luggage over this 30cm step and God bless you if you have to transfer... That, of course, assumes you have kept your ticket so that you can actually get out of the RER!
Of course, at the airport itself, once airside, it is next to impossible to take a decent walk to kill all the time remaining. (The idea of seating comfortably somewhere must have been originated from a non-French citizen, 'cuz these guys just ignore the concept.) The whole friggin' terminal is artificially partitioned and you must take stairs to get from one part to the other, lugging your stuff through a usually disgusting cafeteria area full of cigarette smoke.
Transfer is hardly better. I had last summer to transfer in CDG from my arrival gate to my departure gate (AMS->CDG->MAD, EU-only connection), which happen to be identical to my arrival gate. Same plane, same gate, different flight number. Of course, I had to walk for quite a while to get landside out of the dry zone, walk back (again landside) to the correct security area, check again at security and come back precisely where I started. 20 minutes of running and security checks for nothing. The security agent decided that it was suspicious to carry two laptop batteries and kept me waiting 5 minutes for a supplementary inspection.
The whole organization of CDG is designed for those who already know the system by heart and don't really need any indication, i.e. mostly the French residents. CDG is to be avoided at all costs; for all the bad things about YYZ (and I agree it is bad), CDG is worse.
Most of the comments of this thread are true, but I can reinforce some in the following manner. I can state without hesitation that lack of multilingual-speaking staff at this international airport is compounded by a serious attitude problem with the staff pretty much everywhere and implicit attitude that you should speak French at all cost. French is my mother tongue, and I have no difficulty understanding the remarks of the staff at the airport. I mean, there is attitude and then there is Attitude!
I find it completely unacceptable to have french-only staff at the RER station. Gee! That's a no brainer that you should make sure you have ticket agents that can communicate with the persons transiting there. Have you ever withnessed a family of tired japanese tourists trying to buy an RER ticket from a ticket collector? Or Russians? Never mind the fact that the imbecile civil servant spoke miserable anything (including French!), she decided to take a 15minute break despite the fact she manned the only wicket open at that time! The attitude from the security agent checking the actual tickets was hardly better! Try asking him for help: "You need to ask at the wicket!". For cryin' out loud! this is an entry point for international travellers and all their f*****g signs are in French only! Then, the mecanical stairs don't work. This, of course, after the frustration of finding your way to the station following ill-placed and often confusing french-only signs (there is one for the shuttle that, if followed properly, will take you to a washroom.). Waiting for this shuttle is hardly better, with completely confusing signs: there were two "You are here" dots on the signpost, and no indication of the direction in which the shuttle (running a loop between terminal) was actually going.
It is hard enough to find luggage carts, you cannot take them in the elevators (which are themselves hard enough to find)! If that were not enough, there is clearly insufficient space at checkin so queues for various destinations and various airlines often get helplessly tangled. (In attempting to checkin for an AC flight to YYZ, I found myself in the queue for an AA flight to MIA.) The passport control officer (there is in my experience a single one unless you are travelling from the AF-terminal - whichever number it is) is not to be hurried by the long lineups of people impatiently waiting for their flights! Why should he bother? They are just tourists!
Have you ever boarded the RER with luggage? Why in Heaven's name did they not make the RER station platforms level with the train platforms? You're stuck hauling your luggage over this 30cm step and God bless you if you have to transfer... That, of course, assumes you have kept your ticket so that you can actually get out of the RER!
Of course, at the airport itself, once airside, it is next to impossible to take a decent walk to kill all the time remaining. (The idea of seating comfortably somewhere must have been originated from a non-French citizen, 'cuz these guys just ignore the concept.) The whole friggin' terminal is artificially partitioned and you must take stairs to get from one part to the other, lugging your stuff through a usually disgusting cafeteria area full of cigarette smoke.
Transfer is hardly better. I had last summer to transfer in CDG from my arrival gate to my departure gate (AMS->CDG->MAD, EU-only connection), which happen to be identical to my arrival gate. Same plane, same gate, different flight number. Of course, I had to walk for quite a while to get landside out of the dry zone, walk back (again landside) to the correct security area, check again at security and come back precisely where I started. 20 minutes of running and security checks for nothing. The security agent decided that it was suspicious to carry two laptop batteries and kept me waiting 5 minutes for a supplementary inspection.
The whole organization of CDG is designed for those who already know the system by heart and don't really need any indication, i.e. mostly the French residents. CDG is to be avoided at all costs; for all the bad things about YYZ (and I agree it is bad), CDG is worse.
There were plenty of luggage carts, but he didn't have exact change in a foreign currency-the carts AT CDG and in most of Europe are free.
He didn't have any problem with using the trains from the airport into town-probably because there are no trains from any of these airports into town.
That's the French for you-complaining about the amenities, and after all we've done for them.
Nov 4, 2006, 1:47 pm
#48
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: ORD
Programs: UA 1K
Posts: 16,901
Originally Posted by Mountain Trader
What a coincidence: I was talking to a guy from Paris who took trips to IAD, JFK and ORD in the last year. He said no one spoke French at any of these airports. In fact the only foreign language he heard from any service personnel was the spanish spoken by the hot dog guy.
There were plenty of luggage carts, but he didn't have exact change in a foreign currency-the carts AT CDG and in most of Europe are free.
He didn't have any problem with using the trains from the airport into town-probably because there are no trains from any of these airports into town.
That's the French for you-complaining about the amenities, and after all we've done for them.
There were plenty of luggage carts, but he didn't have exact change in a foreign currency-the carts AT CDG and in most of Europe are free.
He didn't have any problem with using the trains from the airport into town-probably because there are no trains from any of these airports into town.
That's the French for you-complaining about the amenities, and after all we've done for them.
Nov 4, 2006, 1:49 pm
#49
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: ORD
Programs: UA 1K
Posts: 16,901
Originally Posted by You want to go where?
Of the four big hubs in Europe (LHR, FRA, AMS, CDG), I find CDG the worst with the exception of AMS which I have not yet used (although many suggest that it is the best).
Nov 5, 2006, 3:00 am
#50
Join Date: Feb 1999
Location: Denver CO
Posts: 3,682
Originally Posted by milepig
Nice try, but at ORD the carts ARE free and there is a train downtown.
Nov 5, 2006, 3:22 am
#51
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: In the skies of the world
Programs: SAS Gold, FB Gold, BA Gold, EY Silver
Posts: 3,167
CDG was my main airport for some time and I just hated it.
It's old, dirty, confusing, badly signposted, slow baggage delivery. a lot of staff are very indifferent (gets a little better if you speak French)...
I could go on for quite some time!
I like the refurbishments they are doing in terminal 1 now though, makes that dump feel slightly nicer...
It's old, dirty, confusing, badly signposted, slow baggage delivery. a lot of staff are very indifferent (gets a little better if you speak French)...
I could go on for quite some time!
I like the refurbishments they are doing in terminal 1 now though, makes that dump feel slightly nicer...
Nov 5, 2006, 12:20 pm
#52
Join Date: May 2003
Programs: UA Silver
Posts: 1,931
Originally Posted by Mountain Trader
What a coincidence: I was talking to a guy from Paris who took trips to IAD, JFK and ORD in the last year. He said no one spoke French at any of these airports. In fact the only foreign language he heard from any service personnel was the spanish spoken by the hot dog guy.
There were plenty of luggage carts, but he didn't have exact change in a foreign currency-the carts AT CDG and in most of Europe are free.
He didn't have any problem with using the trains from the airport into town-probably because there are no trains from any of these airports into town.
That's the French for you-complaining about the amenities, and after all we've done for them.
There were plenty of luggage carts, but he didn't have exact change in a foreign currency-the carts AT CDG and in most of Europe are free.
He didn't have any problem with using the trains from the airport into town-probably because there are no trains from any of these airports into town.
That's the French for you-complaining about the amenities, and after all we've done for them.
Both of these make it essential to have clear multilingual signs everywhere throughout CDG.
Now, I do not expect everyone to be multilingual in CDG no more than I expect everyone to be multilingual in major US airports (or in any international airport for that matter), but there is a question of willfully ignoring the public you are meant to serve. My point is that, in CDG there is, IMO, an effort to NOT provide very many services in languages other than French. This is the only place in the world I know to do this. A simple comparison of CDG and AMS will show how things can be properly organized without giving up any of your local culture (as in AMS) and how putting your head in the sand can produce poor results (as in CDG). I can also point out that you will find many multilingual signs in US gateways (my favorite example is IAH, where a significant portion of the advertising is in Spanish!)
Next, there is the question of attitude. As a canadian frequently transiting through the US, I always make the point of looking for the very nice poster which declares, loud and clear, the mission of US Customs Agent. (I call it the "We are the face of the nation poster".) For all the bad things that are said about USCustoms, the process is businesslike and efficient; there is an effort done by the majority of Customs officers to be polite, patient, and as pleasant as can be. Customs officers are the first contact, and many wil do their best to explain the process of where to recover luggage etc. (YES! there are no doubt exceptions, but still, there is a mission statement and I believe an honest effort is made.) The same holds generally true of major international gateways. No so in CDG, where a general attitude of condescendence feeds a one-for-all atmosphere.
I absolutely dread CDG. I try to route my travels around it, but it is sometime inevitable that I go through it, and it is a systematic nightmare. Every day brings increased integration of KLM and AF and thus increases the likelyhood that I will have to transfer in CDG. My hope is that the management of CDG learn one lesson or two from AMS. CDG remains an example of what NOT do to.
Nov 5, 2006, 11:36 pm
#53
Join Date: Feb 1999
Location: Denver CO
Posts: 3,682
Originally Posted by respectable_man
There are major differences between major US entry points and CDG. First, the sociological reality is that English is the dominant language, and it happens to be the language in the US. Second, there is a geographical reality, which is that the number of non-French speaking passengers going through CDG is a much greater proportion of traffic than the number of non-English speaking passengers going through a US gateway.
Both of these make it essential to have clear multilingual signs everywhere throughout CDG.
Now, I do not expect everyone to be multilingual in CDG no more than I expect everyone to be multilingual in major US airports (or in any international airport for that matter), but there is a question of willfully ignoring the public you are meant to serve. My point is that, in CDG there is, IMO, an effort to NOT provide very many services in languages other than French. This is the only place in the world I know to do this. A simple comparison of CDG and AMS will show how things can be properly organized without giving up any of your local culture (as in AMS) and how putting your head in the sand can produce poor results (as in CDG). I can also point out that you will find many multilingual signs in US gateways (my favorite example is IAH, where a significant portion of the advertising is in Spanish!)
Next, there is the question of attitude. As a canadian frequently transiting through the US, I always make the point of looking for the very nice poster which declares, loud and clear, the mission of US Customs Agent. (I call it the "We are the face of the nation poster".) For all the bad things that are said about USCustoms, the process is businesslike and efficient; there is an effort done by the majority of Customs officers to be polite, patient, and as pleasant as can be. Customs officers are the first contact, and many wil do their best to explain the process of where to recover luggage etc. (YES! there are no doubt exceptions, but still, there is a mission statement and I believe an honest effort is made.) The same holds generally true of major international gateways. No so in CDG, where a general attitude of condescendence feeds a one-for-all atmosphere.
I absolutely dread CDG. I try to route my travels around it, but it is sometime inevitable that I go through it, and it is a systematic nightmare. Every day brings increased integration of KLM and AF and thus increases the likelyhood that I will have to transfer in CDG. My hope is that the management of CDG learn one lesson or two from AMS. CDG remains an example of what NOT do to.
Both of these make it essential to have clear multilingual signs everywhere throughout CDG.
Now, I do not expect everyone to be multilingual in CDG no more than I expect everyone to be multilingual in major US airports (or in any international airport for that matter), but there is a question of willfully ignoring the public you are meant to serve. My point is that, in CDG there is, IMO, an effort to NOT provide very many services in languages other than French. This is the only place in the world I know to do this. A simple comparison of CDG and AMS will show how things can be properly organized without giving up any of your local culture (as in AMS) and how putting your head in the sand can produce poor results (as in CDG). I can also point out that you will find many multilingual signs in US gateways (my favorite example is IAH, where a significant portion of the advertising is in Spanish!)
Next, there is the question of attitude. As a canadian frequently transiting through the US, I always make the point of looking for the very nice poster which declares, loud and clear, the mission of US Customs Agent. (I call it the "We are the face of the nation poster".) For all the bad things that are said about USCustoms, the process is businesslike and efficient; there is an effort done by the majority of Customs officers to be polite, patient, and as pleasant as can be. Customs officers are the first contact, and many wil do their best to explain the process of where to recover luggage etc. (YES! there are no doubt exceptions, but still, there is a mission statement and I believe an honest effort is made.) The same holds generally true of major international gateways. No so in CDG, where a general attitude of condescendence feeds a one-for-all atmosphere.
I absolutely dread CDG. I try to route my travels around it, but it is sometime inevitable that I go through it, and it is a systematic nightmare. Every day brings increased integration of KLM and AF and thus increases the likelyhood that I will have to transfer in CDG. My hope is that the management of CDG learn one lesson or two from AMS. CDG remains an example of what NOT do to.
Your posts seem more high minded. Yes, a lot of the staff at CDG have no concept of cutomer service. I find the service at IAD just as bad-try using United baggage services for example sometime. I question whether there are a higher percentage of English-only passengers going through CDG than non-English passngers through JFK, but I could be wrong.
Your complaint about langauge seems to say the French should have English services since so many customers speak English. So should major US airports do the same in Spanish? Of course AMS has English available, but not due to an effort to welcome travelers. The Dutch have taught four languages as mandatory classes in their schools since after WW2. It makes going to Holland a snap, but that hardly sets the standard for what others do, whether the others are the French at CDG or Americains at JFK. I think common sense says multi-language signage should be everywhere, and CDG could do a lot better.
I don't have problems with US customs or immigration personnel, especially since they stopped yelling at people about which line to go to. I've found the personnel polite, but I've never had a problem with French immigration either.
My only point is this: When suggesting what others should do, it sometimes helps to first ask "Do we hold ourselves to the same standard?" And certainly on languages at airports, the answer is no.
Last edited by Mountain Trader; Nov 6, 2006 at 8:16 am
Nov 6, 2006, 6:11 am
#54
Join Date: May 2004
Programs: BA blue, LH Senator, KQ (FB) gold
Posts: 8,215
Originally Posted by milepig
Just can't let this pass. What a ridiculous thing to say. You haven't been there but still declare AMS to be worse than CDG although many suggest it is the best. What, may I ask, IS your basis of judgement?
Nov 6, 2006, 8:45 am
#55
Join Date: May 2003
Programs: UA Silver
Posts: 1,931
Originally Posted by Mountain Trader
Your complaint about langauge seems to say the French should have English services since so many customers speak English. So should major US airports do the same in Spanish?
Originally Posted by Mountain Trader
It makes going to Holland a snap, but that hardly sets the standard for what others do, whether the others are the French at CDG or Americains at JFK. I think common sense says multi-language signage should be everywhere, and CDG could do a lot better.
Originally Posted by Mountain Trader
My only point is this: When suggesting what others should do, it sometimes helps to first ask "Do we hold ourselves to the same standard?" And certainly on languages at airports, the answer is no.
Surely it is not too much to ask that international entry points in the EU provide services in some of the official languages of the EU other than French? After all, I expect, as a Canadian, to be able to speak French when I reach any entry point in Canada just as you expect to be able to speak English (or even American English!) when you enter the US.
In the end, what drives me bonkers is not so much the lack of signs, but the implicit attitudes that signs are NOT to be put up. In other words, I can tolerate the absence of service, but not the apparently purposeful denial of services. And this, taken with my frequent logistical nightmares at CDG, singles it out as particularly bad. (I find even the simplest signs, like "Paris par train", to be confusing. Why do I want to take the train to Paris? Why can't they just say "RER vers Paris"? But of course, the RER is a train, just like the TGV!)
BTW, I regret to hear that IAD is also bad, and I did not attempt to be "high-minded"! (We Canadians must truly apologize for everything, but this is stereotypical and let's not get there!)
Nov 7, 2006, 7:25 am
#56
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: CPT
Programs: BA BD SA
Posts: 4,467
I saw the damndest thing at CDG recently: a suitcase coming up from the bowels of T1 got itself lodged into the roof of the conveyor belt! There it dangled, jamming up the works and the belt stopped. Eventually someone came and pulled it free and the whole shebang started again. By this time pax from the next flight were already milling about the belt and as it's rather cramped in that area...
On the subject of signage T1 is especially interesting since your boarding pass has the satellite number printed on it and not the gate number. And the lounges are miles from the gates and require a tenderfoot badge to locate them behind all the construction hoardings.
Oh, and then I get the sweetest, friendliest immigration chap ever! Even greeted in English despite my pathetic mumblings in French. I think he was enjoying freaking the pax out with such unexpected bonhomie.
On the subject of signage T1 is especially interesting since your boarding pass has the satellite number printed on it and not the gate number. And the lounges are miles from the gates and require a tenderfoot badge to locate them behind all the construction hoardings.
Oh, and then I get the sweetest, friendliest immigration chap ever! Even greeted in English despite my pathetic mumblings in French. I think he was enjoying freaking the pax out with such unexpected bonhomie.
Nov 15, 2006, 1:40 pm
#57
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: ATL, GA
Programs: Delta PM/3MM/FC Marriott Platinum
Posts: 131
Please Help!
Next fall, I will be traveling VIE-AMS. The first choice is a non-stop on KLM. If this is not available for award travel, which of the following connecting airports would you recommend: CDG or MXP or PRG? Thank you!
Nov 15, 2006, 1:52 pm
#58
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: AMS
Programs: Flying Blue Gold
Posts: 1,849
Originally Posted by AirGorilla
Next fall, I will be traveling VIE-AMS. The first choice is a non-stop on KLM. If this is not available for award travel, which of the following connecting airports would you recommend: CDG or MXP or PRG? Thank you!
However, as this as little to do with Paris any more, perhaps you should take the question over to the Flying Blue or Sky Team forums for a better response?
Nov 15, 2006, 8:00 pm
#59
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: ATL, GA
Programs: Delta PM/3MM/FC Marriott Platinum
Posts: 131
Originally Posted by bcmatt
Personally I'd say PRG - small, manageable and OK are a nice little airline.
However, as this as little to do with Paris any more, perhaps you should take the question over to the Flying Blue or Sky Team forums for a better response?
However, as this as little to do with Paris any more, perhaps you should take the question over to the Flying Blue or Sky Team forums for a better response?
Dec 27, 2006, 8:31 am
#60
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: ORD
Programs: UA 1K
Posts: 16,901
After avoiding CDG was many years I'm a virgin no longer. It wasn't as bad as I had expected.
I flew into T1 on United on the 26th, and had to get to T2 to pick up Mrs. Milepig who was coming on AA (long story) and then the RER into town.
My arrival at T1: Landed, got to T1 and then circled all the way around the satellites before we arrived at our gate - do the planes only go in one direction? Fairly short walk to immigration, where there was no line at all. I almost walked past it, since I was looking for a line. A strange trip through the habitrail tubes to baggage claim (was the architect on drugs?) where there were actually benches to wait on. The baggage carousel stuck regularly and some poor man kept disappearing into the bowels to get things going again. UA aside - as always the priority tagged bags came off last. Then a walk around the circle to customs where there was no one even watching. Then another walk around the circle to door 22 and a quick walk across the road to the well marked bus stop for the trip to T2. Crowds were non-existent at 9:15 - 10:00 am. The terminal was cold and dirty. Grade B+ with good marks for signs, lack of crowds and bad grades for ugliness and dirt.
T2: the bus stop between 2A and 2C was convenient for AA. Since I was early I scoped out where the AA arivals area was then then headed over to the RER station to buy the tickets. The trip there was hot and crowded. I had directions printed from the CDG web site that indicated I could take a shuttle bus, but the signs in the terminal just pointed me through 2C and then to the RER station, which took less that 10 minutes. The terminal as hot and the crowds were large and shifty looking. Seemed like pickpocket heaven. THe RER station was new, large, open feeling, and the machine took my credit card the first time - unheard of in France. Back to 2A to wait for Mrs. Milepig. From the time her flight status changed to "landed" it took 45 minutes for her to appear in arrivals, and this with no checked luggage. Then a quick walk back to the RER station, where the trains were clearly marked, we waited about 5 extra minutes to get an express, and all went perfect. T2 grade: C-. Ugly, dirty, crowded, confusing signs.
But, overall for an experienced traveler, no worse than many other airports I've used. Still hate LHR and FRA is also right up there. CDG was not as bad as I expected it to be.
I flew into T1 on United on the 26th, and had to get to T2 to pick up Mrs. Milepig who was coming on AA (long story) and then the RER into town.
My arrival at T1: Landed, got to T1 and then circled all the way around the satellites before we arrived at our gate - do the planes only go in one direction? Fairly short walk to immigration, where there was no line at all. I almost walked past it, since I was looking for a line. A strange trip through the habitrail tubes to baggage claim (was the architect on drugs?) where there were actually benches to wait on. The baggage carousel stuck regularly and some poor man kept disappearing into the bowels to get things going again. UA aside - as always the priority tagged bags came off last. Then a walk around the circle to customs where there was no one even watching. Then another walk around the circle to door 22 and a quick walk across the road to the well marked bus stop for the trip to T2. Crowds were non-existent at 9:15 - 10:00 am. The terminal was cold and dirty. Grade B+ with good marks for signs, lack of crowds and bad grades for ugliness and dirt.
T2: the bus stop between 2A and 2C was convenient for AA. Since I was early I scoped out where the AA arivals area was then then headed over to the RER station to buy the tickets. The trip there was hot and crowded. I had directions printed from the CDG web site that indicated I could take a shuttle bus, but the signs in the terminal just pointed me through 2C and then to the RER station, which took less that 10 minutes. The terminal as hot and the crowds were large and shifty looking. Seemed like pickpocket heaven. THe RER station was new, large, open feeling, and the machine took my credit card the first time - unheard of in France. Back to 2A to wait for Mrs. Milepig. From the time her flight status changed to "landed" it took 45 minutes for her to appear in arrivals, and this with no checked luggage. Then a quick walk back to the RER station, where the trains were clearly marked, we waited about 5 extra minutes to get an express, and all went perfect. T2 grade: C-. Ugly, dirty, crowded, confusing signs.
But, overall for an experienced traveler, no worse than many other airports I've used. Still hate LHR and FRA is also right up there. CDG was not as bad as I expected it to be.