Could anyone confirm or challenge the notion that LONDON is the World's Aviation Capital, in terms of the number of
passengers served per year - in excess of 100m, by the time you add LHR + LGW + STN + LTN + LCY.
Afaik, MSE doesn't have an LON designator (yet?).
I don't think anywhere else would come close - only New York and Tokyo have 2 or more airports in WCIs top 30, but LHR beats HND, and LGW beats NRT, whereas LHR beats EWR and JFK combined, with LGW comfortably accounting for LGA, LTN for Westchester etc.
Have I missed anywhere out? I know Atlanta (77.9m) is the busiest single airport, but there are no other passenger facilities there, whereas #2 Chicago (72.6m) is only supplemented by another 20m or so at Midway, with Meigs closed, a handful at Gary, and Peotone just a pipedream.
I know you could use other ways of measuring such a figure (ORD is #1 for pax movements - not sure how it compares with Van Nuys which is #1 for GA), whereas Riyadh will obviously stay the largest in land area for quite some time, with the largest terminal being at HKG until the new Beijing terminal opens.
I know FRA offers more routes than LHR, but would LON as a city overall offer the widest choice, if not perhaps the best connections between such routes. Perhaps that would go to CDG with its "banks" of connecting flight periods? Would LHR still win in terms of numbers of airlines?