Rather than user-friendly conduits for getting from A to B, airports are designed to part travellers from their cash, says Jeff Mills.
When the Victorians built the railway network throughout the UK and what was then the British Empire, almost every major line started and finished in a spectacular terminus designed to signal to the world that civilisation had arrived.
You can still see many of these termini in daily use. London, for example, has Charing Cross, King’s Cross, St Pancras, Marylebone, Euston, Victoria and Waterloo. There are grand examples in York, Edinburgh and other major business centres. Then there are those in overseas cities: the majestic railway station in Kuala Lumpur; Flinders Street station in Melbourne; the vast Victoria Terminus station in Bombay (like Mumbai, now renamed, as the Chhatrapati Shivaji Terminus), and many other slightly less extravagant versions throughout the Commonwealth.
But it wasn’t just as symbols of power that these stations were built; they had a very useful purpose, too. They served the needs of the travelling public who used them day after day, and they were – and still are – spectacularly successful in meeting those needs.
Today, the big international airports have taken over the role of major transport hubs. Where once city fathers could be proud of the grand Victorian Gothic structures of the stations, now it is the concrete, steel and glass of the airports that fulfil this role.
FIT FOR PURPOSE?
So why can’t airports be made to work better? If we were once able to build stations that were ideal for their function, suitably attractive and long-lived additions to the landscape, why do we have so much trouble doing the same with airports? The airport authorities may argue that they have got it right – and, commercially, perhaps they have. Many modern international airports, those in the UK included, must be among the most efficient moneymaking machines in the world. But despite acres of retail space, restaurants, bars and the rest, many of them are ugly and unpleasant to use.
Several of the UK’s airports started out as little more than a wartime runway, or a flying club, with a few huts. They have been developed over the years with commercial considerations taking precedence over aesthetic or logistical ones.
What seems to be overlooked is that airports exist because people need to travel. Small wonder there are times when business travellers or holidaymakers feel as though they are the least important element in an airport’s operation.
It is true that many of the world’s most modern airports, such as those in Bangkok, Dubai, Hong Kong, Singapore, even Keflavik, look fine from the outside, having been conceived on the drawing boards of top international architects and designers. But what about inside, the part that travellers actually have to use?
It is easy to see why some have been described as little more than giant shopping malls, where little thought has been given to the passengers, but perhaps too much thought has been given to extracting a profit from a captive audience.
The airport operators may claim that facilities are better than ever. There are VIP lounges where you can relax or do business; there are decent restaurants. At some, you can even visit a spa or gym or use a meeting room before you board your plane.
But the question remains, is this really what travellers want? If you are doing business wouldn’t you rather do it in the office than the airport lounge; wouldn’t you rather go shopping in a town centre? This highlights another problem faced by airport designers; the conflict between business travellers, who generally want to get through the airport and onto their flights as quickly as possible without distractions such as meandering routes through shops; and leisure travellers, who often treat the airport experience as part of their holiday experience.
Perhaps it’s time to re-think airports. How about building attractive but simple-to-use terminals right by the planes, with nothing but the essentials for those – such as business travellers – who just want to arrive, check-in and go. London City airport springs to mind as a model. I suspect I’m not alone in preferring a clear run to the departure gate without having to navigate the shopping malls and fast-food outlets. And don’t get me started on the bureaux de change and their “interesting” exchange rates. I’ll steer clear of them until I feel the need to be mugged.
Jeff Mills has been a travel reporter and editor for more than 30 years.
