Originally Posted by
BIZZYBOY
What an awful looking and uninviting addition. Who designs these bolt on ideas. Sir Norman Foster would certainly not approve. When you look at Airports around the world they are meant to hold some beauty and be inspiring keeping the romance of air travel fresh and alive. Stansted when built done just that unfortunately it has not maintained or kept to the original look.
Ouch!
Sad to say this is what happens when award winning iconic buildings (YES, I mean you Stansted Airport) need to be adapted at commercial rates to add shareholder value.
It was built as a national asset part of UK PLC, capitalist though I am, this is the price of flogging of the family silver. Worth it though, on balance. Just. Maybe...
But yes, looks awful, am a huge fan of original un-adapted building with clear purpose. MAG has had particular issues where MAN T3 is not being used close to it's designed purpose of high frequency commuter flights for business purposes on mainly 100 seat aircraft, with the odd heavy. MAN T2 also suffers from "Half pint pot" syndrome, but in fairness, STN is now a long way from the hassle free way to board an Air UK 146 to connect via AMS.