Introduction

Airports are becoming an important presence in the architectural and urban realm, turning into sites not only of transit but also of large commercial activities. Furthermore, due to operational necessities of the landing and taking-off of aircrafts, they incorporate vast amounts of land, sometimes equal in size to the urban or semi-urban tissue that they serve. A less apparent phenomenon in the air traffic industry is the proliferation of a divergent sub-type of aerial landscape. While changes in world economy in the 1980s had a drastic influence on the development of major airports, it has also brought about a new type of industry – the low-cost air travel – which in turn has formed a new multi-scalar type of physical and cultural landscape.

Deregulation and its consequences

Following the end of WWII, the International Air Transport Association was founded and formulated air service agreements that determined the key aspects of air travel, and especially regulated the number of airports, airlines, and frequency on routes. Besides the evident economic effect of market regulation, namely the high cost of flying for the consumers, and the inefficiency and overlaps in service, this system carried with it organizational as well as spatial effects.

On the organizational level, a “trinity” was formed between respective governments, national carriers and national airports. Air traffic was largely concentrated around this trinity, with nationally owned and subsidized route operators (KLM, British Airways, Air France) operating from nationally owned airports (Schiphol, Heathrow, Charles De Gaulle) and having most of the market share. Spatially, these agreements created a networked flight scheme between countries, resulting in star shaped configurations.

Deregulation of air traffic, initiated in the United States following the oil crises of 1970s, arrived at Europe only a decade later. The European version deregulated most restrictions on competition between airlines, especially with regard to fares, flight frequencies, airplane capacities and entry-exit routes.

Competition instantly influenced the spatial operation of airlines. The first effect was the utilization of the hub-and-spoke networks: airlines originally flying between medium-sized airports increasingly moved to a system by which direct flights were replaced with connection routes via one or few hubs. The logic behind such an organizational network was the reduction of low-capacity flights from minor destinations (spokes) into hubs – the high-capacity destinations. From a consumer standpoint, this meant a decrease in flight prices, but also an increase in flight time and mileage – having to take indirect flights – and long connection waiting time at the hubs.

The increase in air traffic demand that followed deregulation called for the expansion of these transport centers, and their forming as multi-purpose activity spaces due to their new role as intermediary connection zones, with more and more time spent between flights. The proliferation of this captive audience transformed the major hubs from simple transport terminals into shopping centers.

Low-cost Aviation

Another major change following deregulation was the rise of the low-cost airline industry. The European low-cost airlines mostly followed the American business model that was developed by Southwest Airlines in the 1960s, which basically contained two elements. First, low operating costs, meaning ticketless sales, low maintenance costs, and high daily utilization of aircrafts. Second, image and target population; low-cost carriers use aggressive marketing strategies to market high frequency, scheduled, point-to-point short-haul services.

Low-cost airports

The elements of this business model have a high correlation to the spatial operation of the low-cost airlines – i.e. to a spatial economy. The ticketless scheme saves on airport sales and customer-service space. The use of a single type of small-size aircrafts saves on maintenance, hanger space and runway needs (Figure 1). Furthermore, the point-to-point system does not require terminal infrastructures that are necessary for managing flight connections at hub airports. Thus, the low-cost model naturally leads to a choice of small-scale airports, with short runways, small hangers, and simple passenger terminals.

Low-cost regional development: learning form Luton

London Luton Airport was established in 1938 as “Luton Municipal Airport”, and served as a military base in WWII. In following decades it started serving as a base for chartered flights. Luton’s development since the mid-1980s was largely a consequence of its battle with Stansted over low-cost carriers. While Ryanair moved its operations to Stansted in 1991, Easyjet’s appearance in 1995, and its decision to base operations in Luton, caused the air traffic from Luton to almost double from 1995 to 1999, positioned today as UK’s 5th largest passenger airport, with low-cost travel being 92% of its business volume.

Another major impetus for airport develoment was the incorporation of mass transit connection into Luton in1999, which, as advertised by the airport, enables passengers to reach central London within sixty minutes of disembarking an aircraft and vice versa, highlighting an image of an airport as a transit point, where one does not spend unnecessary waiting time.

What does all this mean in terms of physical design? Luton’s aerial photos from 2000 and 2009 clearly show that its growth concentrated within its boundaries (Figure 2). They also show that very limited urban development took place in the vicinity of the airport, mostly comprised of parking facilities with only few new buildings. This is indicative of the low-cost economy’s effect on the airport landscape: as opposed to hub airports, which develop massive terminals with a diverse set of amenities, and rely on the commercial activities, the low-cost airport is minimal, and serves as a terminal in the traditional sense – a point of transfer between modes of transport.

Low-cost landscape

The dissemination of low-cost landscape is both physical as well as representational. A comparison of Ryanair and British Airways’ marketing strategies (Figures 3-4) shows how, through sexual innuendoes, low-cost carriers try and appeal to the lowest common denominators. They are not trying to sell dignity, but rather an image of cheapness that resembles aggressive mass marketing of other consumer products. Flying ceases to be a luxurious commodity, and these images wish to convey that they are available to all and are commonplace.

The difference in advertisements between low-cost and major airlines also signifies the dissolving and diffused character of geographies. While major airlines market themselves by promoting the locations which they serve – always the central, iconic and luxurious locations such as Paris, Rome, New York etc. (Figure 5) –low-cost airlines market the price – one can fly very cheap, and it doesn’t matter where (Figure 6). Low-cost landscape then is that of “no frills” journey and cheap thrills on destination.

Notably, the airport infrastructure is also part of the marketing strategy. While hubs are marketed as “cities”, the landscape of low-cost airports is utilized as a flat, poster element. Since one cannot hide the size of the hangers they become ad surfaces in the consumerist warfare of late capitalist mechanism that gave rise to low-cost culture. (Figures 7)

Back-stage/front-stage

What we see with the rise of the Post-Fordist economy is the exacerbation of what Snyder and Wall describe as front stage/backstage paradigm of distribution, but also its dissemination into and diffusion within the landscape. That is the consequence of the proliferation of mass consumption culture that followed deregulation and enabled new strata of society to enjoy more consumption. The backstage landscape thrives on the local and regional scale. It is the off-center service point to the center stage urban landscape. In terms of air transit, it is the location of the smaller, peripheral airports that have been described as the bases for the low-cost operations. On the urban and regional level, the backstage/front-stage is equivalent to the division of low-cost landscape/ high-cost real-estate.

In Europe, however, this paradigm is actually in a process of being dissolved due to the proliferation of low-cost aviation. If one were to look at the destinations covered by Luton, as a case study of a low-cost point of exit, it is obvious that there is no differentiation between wealthier Western European locals and Eastern European destinations. Up until the 1990s, economic, cultural and spatial development in Europe was mainly focused in a region that stretches from the UK, through Western Germany, Northern Italy, France and down to Spain – what is referred to as the “Blue Banana”, that correlated to the volume of air traffic as well (Figure 8). What is being formed due to the new travel opportunities is a new “Blue Banana” – parallel and east to the original one (Figure 9). The borders of backstage and front stage are disappearing, and the constructed landscape that develops – the low cost cultural landscape – seems more and more similar all around. “Pluralism” in the late capitalist society eventually collapses cultural and spatial diversity towards entropy.

Iddo Ginat is an Israeli architect, and a Master in Design Studies Candidate at the Harvard Graduate School of Design. Robert de Miguel is a Spanish architect, and Master in Urban Design Candidate at the Harvard Graduate School of Design. The essay is based on a research from 2010 conducted in a collaboration with Julia Grinkrug, a PhD Candidate at the Technion, Israeli Institute of Technology.