Airlines changing itineraries more often

Airlines, particularly those with international routes, are juggling shortages in not just employees but also long haul plane availability. I don't think the changes are capricious or nefarious, just a sign of the times as we emerge from the pandemic and travel is reopening in fits and starts. In other words, it goes with the territory for anyone booking travel these days, especially for travel abroad, to understand that this is on ongoing problem.

As I said, that's what I had been assuming up until now, when this itinerary change happened that had nothing to do with staffing or airplane capacity, and this was not a long-haul flight, it was a two and a half hour flight I was booted off, even though the flight itself was not changed or canceled.

tl;dr

Good luck.

Ah, I see, you didn't actually read my post before commenting, that explains why your reply raised issues I had already addressed.
If you think about it, it is an opportunity for the airlines to make a little extra revenue. I paid roughly $3000 for my tickets when I booked a month and a half before the flight. The airline changes the itinerary to make me get in 5 hours later than I originally wanted to. If I really want or need to get in at my original earlier arrival time, and the only option is for me to change my itinerary, but now it's less than a month away, prices have gone up, they can get more $1,200 more from me. And also, by the website not allowing me to keep my original transatlantic flight if I wanted to return to my original FRA-HEL flight, and the new transatlantic flight is sold out in premium economy....so I get a regular coach seat even though I paid extra for a premium economy, and the airline now gets to sell my premium economy seat on my original flight to someone else, and at a higher rate than they charged me for it because we're only 2 weeks away from the flight. It's win-win for the airline, they get $1200 more from me plus however much a premium economy transatlantic seat 3 weeks out goes for from someone else. An algorithm that basically rolls the dice on a certain number of passengers being willing to take that bad deal isn't far-fetched at all, this sort of model is used in several other industries already.

I have read enough to understand yours and everyones' frustration with this sort of thing, but I really do not buy into the conspiratorial "money making" angle at all.

I did read your whole post and didn't find it too long. If I had found it too long, I'd have just moved on to the next post in the forum without comment.

I had one change on my April trip when one of the flights from my local airport was dropped and I was moved to another flight. There are fights every 2 hours or so, so that didn't seem unusual. I had a few more changes that were a couple of minutes here and there but they don't really count in my mind. I fly Delta and all 4 of my flights last month were 90-100% full.

I am not suspicious. I can't imagine that they would intentionally cause their employees more work particularly at this time when everyone is short-staffed, crabby and exhausted.

You've, of course, had many more flights than I have...sounds like you are flying for work as well. Very exasperating for you for sure when there is no apparent reason for the changes.

Glad you got back your original itinerary. But even if the original itinerary was not available, an individual would not necessarily need to pay to change their flight. A 5 hour increase would most likely be considered a significant change.

In that case, most carriers will allow an individual to pick another flight that would meet their needs at no cost. Doesn't matter if the ticket price has increased. I've taken advantage of this a couple of times last year on a basic economy ticket when the airline changed my flight.

it's not a secret, airlines are short-staffed. So are airports. One place where your suspicions may be grounded, however, is consolidating two half-full flights into one full one. For all sort of reasons.

On two domestic roundtrips recently the boarding agents made a point of saying our flight today is totally full and if we see you have a bag that's a little too big, we're checking it for you. They were also mildly looking for volunteers to move onto another flight.

Boy, do I understand your frustration. I just returned from Poland and every leg both going to and coming home was a nightmare. To keep it brief, I'll just give a few examples. Returning flight from Frankfurt to Newark we booked economy plus and paid dearly for that upgrade. Then they changed equipment, put us in regular economy at the back of the plane and none of us received notification that this had happened. From Krakow to Frankfurt the plane was delayed because there was a piece of luggage in the cargo hold that belonged to no one on the plane. They had to completely unload it until they found the luggage. Because of this we missed our take off slot; this caused such a delay that we missed our connection in Frankfurt and had to fly out the next day. Ground control directed our plane to a gate that was too small for the plane, had to wait for a "tug" to come and "tug" us to the proper size gate. Inflight service was less than stellar due to "lack of staff". Lack of staff seems to be the buzz word of the day because it was the excuse used for everything. Frankfurt and Newark airports were crazy crowded. I'm glad you got your original flight back.

I booked a domestic flight listed on United's own website and overnight the seat assignment changed - when I check the app on my phone it shows the equipment changed from an Airbus 319 to a Boeing 737 Max 9 --
was it a coincidence that the plane changed less than a day after I bought my ticket, or was it that United is doing some kind of bait-and-switch to get people's money before they tell them that they are going to be riding in a 737 Max?

I have read enough to understand yours and everyones' frustration with
this sort of thing, but I really do not buy into the conspiratorial
"money making" angle at all.

I LOVE a good conspiracy theory, so it wouldn't surprise me. I'm frustrated because all 3 of my flights booked this year have had major changes. Twice, direct flights were changed to connecting flights and the third, I purposely chose a connection to avoid Pearson airport in Toronto, but my connection was changed to Toronto.

Now I'm going to have to check those original flights to see if they were actually cancelled. And don't get me started on my conspiracy theories on insurance companies...

Yes, I'm sure the airlines are doing this on purpose just to piss you off and make you pay more. That's their aim; to have as many customers as possible be so dissatisfied that they decide to avoid using their airline in the future.

"My original itinerary was leave IAH 3:45PM, and arriving in Frankfurt 8:20AM, then 9:15AM from Frankfurt arriving Helsinki 12:40PM"

I'm a little surprised that this is considered a legal connection after a transatlantic flight. 55 minutes to deplane, go through Passport Control, and make it to your next gate. In Frankfurt. Possibly in a different terminal? JMO, but I would have been happier with a later connecting flight.

Any time we've had a major flight change that resulted in a significant change in either departure or arrival time, we've been able to make a more favorable change at no additional cost. It seems not all airlines still do this?

NY Times just had an article on this problem yesterday. https://www.nytimes.com/2022/05/24/travel/airline-flight-itinerary.html

Yes, I'm sure the airlines are doing this on purpose just to piss you
off and make you pay more. That's their aim; to have as many customers
as possible be so dissatisfied that they decide to avoid using their
airline in the future.

No need to be sarcastic, CJean. Airlines have been nickel-and-diming passengers more and more in the past 20 years - charging for checked bags that used to be free. Charging more for the ability to select your seat in coach, especially for the "preferred" coach seats like exit rows, when that used to always be free. Has all this been pissing off customers? Absolutely. Are the airlines continuing to do it in spite of the fact that they know it pisses off customers, because it makes money? Again, absolutely. When almost all the majors (with the exception of Southwest) are doing it, that gives them cover to get away with it. And even longer than that, airlines overselling flights to maximize revenue has been standard practice for decades. They know overselling means they will fairly frequently have to bump passengers, and then they'll have to compensate them. They use algorithms to determine the sweet spot of which flights and by how much to overbook to optimize the increased revenue:compensation paid out, They even use algorithms that decide how much compensation gate agents are allowed to offer, and when they are allowed to up the ante for volunteers, and when they are allowed to involuntarily bump. Given this history, it's naive to blithely dismiss out of hand the possibility that airlines might be employing an algorithm that occasionally moves some passengers off flights, offers them a limited number of reschedules, and makes it attractive to some passengers to pay more for more extensive rearrangements of their reservations than the airlines are required to offer. Especially when the airlines can do it under the cover of "crew and fleet shortages." As the saying goes, where there is crisis, there is opportunity.

Any time we've had a major flight change that resulted in a
significant change in either departure or arrival time, we've been
able to make a more favorable change at no additional cost. It seems
not all airlines still do this?

"More favorable," but not necessary the most favorable, which is why what I said about making it attractive to some passengrs to pay more for extensive changes beyond what the airlines are required to offer might come into play.

I'm a little surprised that this is considered a legal connection
after a transatlantic flight. 55 minutes to deplane, go through
Passport Control, and make it to your next gate. In Frankfurt.
Possibly in a different terminal? JMO, but I would have been happier
with a later connecting flight.

Frankfurt's minimum connection time, whether international-domestic, or international-international, is currently 45 minutes. Both my inbound and connecting flight are Lufthansa, so not only are the both in Terminal 1, but they're both in Pier A of Terminal 1. Given that geography, and the short duration of the connection, I'd rather take the slight risk of missing a connection, over the certainty of 5 hours in the Frankfurt airport. Even if I were to miss my connection, there's the possibility I could go standby on a flight earlier than the 5 hour layover one. I'm carryon only so I don't have to worry about bags being rerouted.

There's no conspiracy to squeeze customers who already paid for flights. Flight schedules are constantly in flux, being revised (by many algorithms) frequently, for lots of perfectly valid (if difficult to understand) reasons. Expect your booked flights to shift and change, sometimes repeatedly, until you are seated on the flight, the door is closed, and the aircraft has been pushed back from the gate.

This is not necessarily a bad thing -- any flight change is an opportunity to get a better flight than the one you booked.

I agree about that 55 minute connection in FRA (your original booking). That's crazy. No way I would take that connection. At that airport I want a minimum of 2 hours to connect, 3 hours or more is in my comfort zone for FRA.

Expect more (a LOT more) schedule jostling in the coming months. The real fun of the peak summer travel season has not begun yet. Passengers are in for a bumpy ride. Fasten your seat belts, pack plenty of patience, and be prepared to be flexible.

No conspiracy that we know of at this time, you mean. It's fine to say you don't believe this is happening, but to say with absolute certainty that it is not happening is as foolhardy as it would be if I were saying it absolutely is happening, which I am not. When things like what I am suggesting is a possibility do happen, we rarely learn about it right away, it's often years before the public finds out. For instance, the Wells Fargo cross-selling account fraud scandal. Up until the story broke in 2016, few people would have suspected such a large, stable, venerable institution to be capable of such a thing, but it had been going on for several years. Spirit and Frontier both got fined several hundred thousand each for chronically violating rules for compensating bumped passengers. I'm not sure why some people choose to be so incredulous about the mere possibility that something like this might be going on.

Flights shifting or being canceled due to crew and equipment I can understand, which is why I didn't question the previous four itinerary changes, I just assumed that was the case, but being bumped off a flight that was still flying, and the airline being unable to give me a reason why I was bumped (but fortunately letting me back on), it's weird.

I've done short connections through FRA before no problem - if you're connecting via the same airline. Maybe some people like sitting around in airports, I don't. I'll report back in two weeks with my experience.

Delta announces summer flight schedule cutbacks: https://www.cnn.com/travel/article/delta-air-lines-cuts-summer-schedule/index.html

KLM struggling with flights from AMS: https://airwaysmag.com/klm-halts-ticket-sales-ams/

More fodder for the conspiracy theorists? Or is it simply a sign of the difficulties all airlines are having balancing supply and demand for flights? Methinks the latter, but whatever, the issues are real and they are not evidently going to straighten out anytime soon.

Yes, I'm sure the airlines are doing this on purpose just to piss you
off and make you pay more. That's their aim; to have as many customers
as possible be so dissatisfied that they decide to avoid using their
airline in the future.

Careful what you don't want to believe. That New York Times Article https://www.nytimes.com/2022/05/24/travel/airline-flight-itinerary.html that someone posted the link to has some great talking points:

If you’re annoyed now, Phoebe, you’re not going like this next bit at
all. You were most likely the victim of industrywide policies that
discriminate against a specific kind of customer — let’s call them
“normal” — who choose the cheapest airfare they can find, no matter
what airline it’s on.

That matters because, according to Professor Acharya, airline
algorithms rank passengers in order of importance, based on variables
that might include fare class, loyalty status, whether you paid in
miles or dollars, how big your group is and whether you’re an airline
employee.

When I presented that answer to Professor Archarya, he warned that
there might also be a “shady” possibility. Airlines sometimes tweak
algorithms to give weight to revenue considerations over customer
satisfaction, he said, and it was theoretically possible Southwest
held some of those Hartford to Tampa seats open to maximize revenue by
selling later.

And my personal favourite:

Of course, the line between corporate greed and customer satisfaction
is hidden deep within secret airline algorithms.

I have flown quite a bit over the past year and had numerous changes. Often I have called and turned those into more advantageous flights than what I originally booked. But what if I just took what the airline offered because I didn’t know enough? We have had posters on here who have done just that - lost money by taking what was offered. I have also just chalked up my changes to the difficulties of airlines getting back up to speed again. But I sure wouldn’t write off algorithms…..

What I am liking (NOT) most recently are the notifications I am getting from American “Your flight has changed. Check back with us later to see the changes.” What? If they know it has changed, tell me what it has changed to. Still getting that message for my June 10 flight. Or maybe they just can’t keep their online info updated. That would also be a problem.

What I am liking (NOT) most recently are the notifications I am getting from American “Your flight has changed. Check back with us later to see the changes.” What? If they know it has changed, tell me what it has changed to.

At least you got a notification. Delta change my flight and didn't send anything, no email, nothing. Since then I've been checking the app at least once a day. I'll probably still be refreshing it until I'm at the gate.

Allan: Thanks, very interesting!

Nick: yeah, you bring up a good point, there is always Hanlon's Razor: "Never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity."

And some airline CEOs earn as little as $10 million a year. It would
be unfair to expect the poor souls to actually run the company
properly whilst also struggling by on such a meagre salary.

But who says they're not running the company properly? As customers, we can think that if it's not run in a way that puts us first. But that CEO likely makes his millions by doing what the shareholders demand. Profits. He or she gets bonuses, stock options, etc. by making profits. The customers? A pesky problem. But as long a the customers pay, there is no incentive to do better. Until the customers stand up as a collective group and stop opening their wallets, nothing will change.

Mark, I appreciate your succinct defense of short connection times -- I've tried to express similar views here on the RS forum but it feels like swimming against the tide here, where travelers seem to have time to spare. I too would rather take some risk of missing a connection over the certainty of spending hours in the airport.

I also appreciate your example of Wells Fargo's criminal character -- when I've brought that topic up as well here in the forum it seemed to take many posters by surprise, which makes me wonder yet again where people get their news from. The major banks have all decided that some measly slap-on-the-wrist fine in the millions or low billions of $ that can be written off and/or passed on to customers anyway is a small price to pay for grabbing everything they can off the table, or under the table, or passing through the ether.

https://www.corporatecomplianceinsights.com/banks-15b-in-fines-in-2020/

" Wells Fargo had the second-highest [fine], from a single case at $3 billion. Goldman Sachs accounted for the third-highest fine from a single case, at $2 billion.

Finbold.com chief editor Oliver Scott commented: “Fines on financial institutions are projected to grow in the coming years, as the U.S. and other countries reforms existing regulations while increasing sanctions with anti-money laundering regulations remaining a key enforcement priority."

My sister flew Chicago to Athens on American a few days ago. Her reservation had one of those your flight has changed…check back for details banners across it for days. We checked status every day and it all looked fine. The flight went as planned and she’s there now. I don’t know what the deal is with that American notice.

United has finally been able start bringing its approx 50 Pratt-Whitney-engined 777-200s back into service this week. About 1/3 of them are already flying or scheduled out of storage in Victorville in the next couple of days. These planes have been grounded since an "uncontained engine failure" a year ago last February on a flight departing Denver for Hawaii. The planes in question include "domestic cabin" 777-200s and Polaris/Premium Economy configured 777-200ERs.

So far these planes are being scheduled on long haul domestic routes like SFO-EWR and LAX-EWR, and high-volume hub-to-hub routes, like SFO-ORD and DEN-IAH. They're not showing up on international long-hauls yet; they may need recertification for ETOPS operation.

The bottom line is United is bringing a bunch of capacity on line, which is going to mean some schedule shuffling. But it also means narrow-bodies that have been flying these routes are being freed up to add flights elsewhere.

Good to know, Valerie! I did get one email notification of a change - so maybe that is it. I just figured there was yet another change coming.

don’t know what the deal is with that American notice.

I recall getting email notifications from AA pre pandemic of a "change" and what changed could be quite small or insignificant, like a flight number (but the flights had no other changes), or a change of equipment, or a small change of a few minutes in departure or arrival time. I seem to recall having to study the "before and after" itineraries to figure it out because AA did not necessarily spell it out.

What is going on now seems more significant, but still, I think that some of these airlines do a very poor job of communicating the change(s) in their notifications. It always seemed to me that the farther in advance of the flights that we made the booking (say 6 months), the more likely there would be a change of, say, a flight number but nothing else.

"may need recertification for ETOPS operation"

ETOPS - engines turn or passengers swim

Of the 6 or 7 flights I have taken/have planned for this year, every one had at least one schedule change. My brother traveled to Europe with us and the first leg of his return flight got canceled at 1am before his flight at noon, so he had to stay an extra day (and therefore also get a new Covid test). Unfortunately, this seems to be the reality of travel for the time being.

OK now Im nervous. My flight to Stockholm got cancelled and they rebooked me ( after 10 hours on hold) To a flight with only one hour layover in Franfurt between United and Lufstanza. Not looking forward to spending another 2 days on hold. Is this an impossible connection????

Not necessarily impossible, but...risky.

As always, ask yourself the basic questions about risks and consequences. Let's say you don't make that 1 hour connection. Just how bad would it be? If there are frequent flights onward to your destination (on the same airline) that same day, then even if you miss that connection, you still have a pretty good chance of still getting there the same day. If your flight onward is the last possible one of that day, then the potential risk is an overnight there FRA. How bad would that be? If you have a relaxed week planned in Stockholm, maybe not the end of the world. But if you are scheduled to board a cruise ship the next morning, or planning to zoom off on a tightly-scripted, fast-moving tour, then the impact of missing that connection goes way up. Presumably, this is on inbound travel, so could mess up your plans, rather than your return home (which might just result in you missing a day at work...).

FRA is not my favorite airport, certainly not for a tight connections. I'd be happier with 2 or more hours, and I'd be looking at what better options I could find. But it really depends on the details of what it would mean for you if you missed the flight, your tolerance for that risk, and how badly you dread "fixing" it.

ETOPS - engines turn or passengers swim

Love it. :-)

Strictly speaking, "Extended-range Twin-engine Operational Performance Standards."

Certification that allows twin-engine planes to fly routes that may be up to 60 minutes from nearest suitable airport. I.e., needed to fly TATL or TPAC routes.

ETOPS now goes beyond 60 minutes. It varies by aircraft, but some are over 300...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ETOPS#:~:text=In%20November%202009%2C%20the%20Airbus,Zealand%20adopting%20said%20regulatory%20extension.

...which may or may not make one feel comfortable if an engine goes out over the middle of the Pacific!

Thanks for the kind words avirosemail. I guess part of it may be this site is geared towards advice to people who are beginners to European travel and have a lot of trepidation, and some people just never lose the sense that travel is stressful. The idea of a missed connection can be very stressful to contemplate - until you break it down and look at the pros and cons. Yeah, if I have the choice between a tight connection and one that leaves just an hour later, I may lean towards the later fight, but as the time difference between two connection options grows, I'm going to lean back toward the tight flight, and not just because I find sitting around in an airport a boring waste of time. The later a flight is in the day, the higher probability that it will be delayed, or possibly even rescheduled for the next day, so the fewer options you have once that flight is rescheduled. So if you book a tight morning connection, and make that connection, great, you're fine. If you miss that connection, you still have that afternoon connection as a possibility (may have several other flights to your final destination you can get on later that morning, or mid-day). If you settle for a later connection that doesn't leave until the afternoon, you'll be watching the tight morning connection (and any other possible mid-day connections take off without you, and then what happens if your afternoon flight gets canceled due to weather, or crew timing out, etc. all of which are more likely to happen in the afternoon? You have fewer options. So there is risk either way, there is always risk when traveling, but I choose the flight with less risk of being canceled/rescheduled, and that gives me more options when something does happen.

Totally get what Mark is saying. Nothing worse than having to spend 4-5 hours sitting around waiting for a connection. That happened on one of our BA connections from Heathrow to FRA. Making a long story short, with all the shuffling, it would have worked out for the shorter connection, which they bumped us to a later connection which we in turn missed due to the late arrival of connecting flight. Most recently AF had us making a one-hour connection at CDG for a connecting flight to Nice. AF insisted it was plenty of time. It wasn't. The only way we made our flight was because we line jumped at security and other passengers were missing flights left and right because of poor connections. There was a connecting flight that left an hour later, and AF would not schedule us for that connection when we called and asked to be put on that flight. They were still selling seats, so it was still available. Not sure how airlines figure these things out, but it's not always in the passenger's best interest. Yes, we made the flight. But we were in business, got off the plane quickly, ran to the tram, had to switch terminals via tram, then go through security and passport control. We did our part, but line jumping wasn't something we wanted to do. The next connection they would have put us on was a 5-hour wait.

in the latest issue of Bloomberg Businessweek, there are FIVE articles about the travel hell awaiting tourists this summer. And this morning on the radio Peter Greenberg seconded that, and said things won't improve until mid-September.

Bloomberg's advice? brace yourself for a turbulent trip, all facets of the industry are facing disruptions, prices are spiking for everything, 73% of Americans plan to travel this summer (!), this may end up being the most challenging travel summer ever, stay flexible.

55 minute layover in Frankfurt was plenty of time. Walked off my plane from IAH, turned left and passport control was right there, waited in line behind one person, went straight on through, and my connecting gate was about 150 yards. Had time to use the restroom browse a gift shop while I waited for my flight to be ready to board. When connecting with the same airline in Frankfurt there really is no reason to feel you have to build in a long layover, I’m certainly glad I wasn’t cooling my heels there for nearly 5 hours, like United almost did to me, was able to have a nice afternoon in Helsinki instead.

Interestingly, flight tracker shows your IAH flight arriving late into FRA, and your connecting flight to HEL departing late from FRA - looks like you might have caught a break in the action.

Flight from IAH arrived 7 minutes late, flight to HEL departed 6 minutes late, and like I said, still had time to use restroom and look around in a gift shop, and on top of that still stood around for quite a while more than 6 minutes waiting for Group 4 to be called - Didn’t need to catch a break to catch this connection.

Didn’t need to catch a break to catch this connection.

You caught a couple of breaks. First, you are fortunate that your transatlantic flight was not late on arrival by more than a few minutes. Second, your connecting flight gate was close by and you encountered no lines through passport control.

Yes, my inbound flight arrived within 15 minutes of its scheduled arrival time - as it does 71% of the time. Yes, my outbound flight was close by - as I knew it would be. Yes, passport control was quick and efficient - as previous experience had led me to expect it to be. That’s not “catching breaks,” it’s playing pretty comfortable odds. Although it may gall some here that I actually caught my flight with plenty of time to spare despite not cowing to the “conventional wisdom” of those on this site who want to catastrophize layovers shorter than 2-3 hours, there was nothing particularly fortuitous about me making this flight.

I received an email yesterday that my Air France codeshare flight to Paris had been canceled; this is the second time in two months that I have to reschedule my flight (last one was due to change of airplane type which didn't have the seat type I booked). On top of these there're also numerous schedule changes.
I did my homework and figured out my best option before I talked to an Delta agent; she was able to rebook it for me in a matter of minutes. Instead of my previous window bulkhead seat now I have to settle for a middle section aisle seat. Let's hope this is the last time I have to rebook my flight!

Sitting at the gate in Frankfurt for my flight back to Houston. HEL-FRA was supposed to arrive at 8:05, FRA-IAH was supposed to depart 10:00. That’s 1 hour 55 minutes, less than the “bare minimum” 2 hours, with 3 being more ideal, that some here insist is necessary when flying through Frankfurt.

Flight from Helsinki took off 29 minutes late. Didn’t “catch a break” there.

Arrived 6 minutes late, at 8:11, but then had to exit plane down stairs on to tarmac to board a bus that would take us to all terminals. Had to walk to entrance to Z terminal. Didn’t “catch a break” there.

10:00 AM Flight was supposed to board at 9:15. Line to get to get documents checked before passport control was very long, the woman was very slow, and seemed to be getting trained on how to fill out a time sheet as she was checking documents. Didn’t “catch a break” there.

Passport control line was also quite long, didn’t “catch a break there.”

Had a long walk to get to terminal Z and then down to gate 25, didn’t “catch a break” there.

Still got to my gate at 8:55, which if you do the math is still a healthy 20 minutes before boarding was scheduled to start. It’s now 9:30 and my flight still hasn’t started boarding yet, I guess you could say I “caught a break”… but it’s one I didn’t need to “catch,” and it’s also somewhat predictable that when earlier flights run late, a cascading effect where later flights do too is almost inevitable.

When you consistently get the same result, even when adverse conditions occur, that’s not “catching breaks,” that’s just something you can pretty reliably count on.

Kudos for sticking to your guns on this subject, Mark!

I was once re-booked to a later connection in Heathrow that had me wandering the airport for hours instead of giving me a fighting chance to make the original plane, which had not completed boarding as I was coming off the first flight, but a BA agent was standing at the gate with new assignments, undercutting my being game for a sprint , OJ-style, through the terminal. It still rankles.

Mark, you are right, you did not catch any breaks. Actually, all pretty normal for Frankfurt. And with the expected result within the time frames. Honestly, I do not understand the fear of FRA here.

I'm one who has never had a problem with airline transfers in FRA, so I too, don't ascribe to the often times mentioned allowing 3-4 hours between inbound/outbound connections - just go with the times the airline sells the ticket on.

Having said that, the OP certainly DID catch a break on his inbound arrival into FRA - a very low-percentage of travellers deplane next to a Passport Control gate and have their on-going flight gate immediately after that same Passport Control gate - just saying.

Personally (the key word here is "personally"), I think FRA is a nasty transfer airport both inbound and outbound, which is why I go through MUC as much as possible - now that is a smooth running airport.

just go with the times the airline sells the ticket on.

That's key, my inbound itinerary with 55 minute layover was not one I had created, it was one that Lufthansa offered me, which makes me think they knew the gates would be close and it wouldn't be a problem when they offered the itinerary, hence why "catching a break" isn't really applicable here.

That is true about a tarmac and bus landing, the bus comes in almost to Passport control, the time we made an almost impossible connection due to our plane having been delayed in FRA on its prior way to PHL, we were bused. Had the plane gone to its expected gate, that would have been out around A69...a very long hike back to B gate for our connection to Turkey, no Passport control but still a hike), as opposed to entering at it. Still a far out gate landing would still have probably added only another 10 minutes to Mark's time, still well within safety time.