We are flying our college-aged daughter to Rome for a summer program. One of the flight options on KLM puts her through Amsterdam with one hour between landing and next takeoff. That seems a bit short to me, but KLM is pricing it out. Is that workable? The next option is a two hour layover in Amsterdam. If one hour is too short, is two workable? Thanks!
Posted by
Tresana, Highlands Ranch, CO, USA
23626 posts
We had a one hour window last December and missed by five minutes. Our big problem was that we were buried near the back of the plane opposite the door. Took us over 20 minutes to get off the plane., jumped the immigration lines but it is a big airport. We were reroute on the next plane OK but it was a four hour wait. If this is her first trip, I would schedule two hours.
Posted by
Lewiston, Idaho, USA
2092 posts
Valerie, I have taken this flight many times and have make connections in 1 hour but it is harrowing! I've had to be really aggressive to get through passport control and run as fast as possible to get through the gate! (Not a pretty sight!) I too would definitely recommend the 2-hour option for a first timer especially after a long & tiring flight.
Posted by
Berkeley, CA
19 posts
Hello, Valerie, if it's a published connection, i.e. the one that the airline offers, it's probably ok, since they make that connection every day. I, though, always prefer to have too much time rather than too little. I personally would go for the 2 hour layover. Though Schipol is an efficient, easy-to-use airport, it's also huge!
Posted by
Grapevine, TX, USA
875 posts
I'd vote for the 2-hr layover. One hour seems skimpy even if the plane is on time.
Posted by
Lakewood, Colorado
19274 posts
' one hour between landing and next takeoff" One hour between the scheduled landing and the next takeoff. In 8 flights to Europe this decade, two have been an hour late. I've seen flights (fortunately I wasn't on that day) that were 9 and 10 hours late. You just never can tell. You have to trust your airline to take care of you.