It wasn't so much about connecting across airports, but to dispel the notion that major cities can *only* operate with a single large hub, like the oft-cited AMS with its five runways. The difference, as we know, is London attracts a massive amount of O&D or point-to-point air travel, in addition to connecting passengers. In that sense, New York is a better comparison.

Even with connections you can well see long haul destinations connecting into an enlarged LGW, e.g. OW airlines, for European connections with BA, which would today go via LHR. The launch of the CX route into LGW is a sign of that. I also think the liberation of the market would see BA increasing regional UK services into LGW to support better connections; the capacity will allow them to.

If Transport for London take another look at Crossrail 2 proposals and consider a southern extension to LGW, so there's a high speed rail service into the centre of London, I think Gatwick becomes a slam-dunk, as it were.

The Heathrow boss is grappling at straws with the curfew; it won't address the massive issue with road traffic around LHR - the thing that's causing pollution problems.

Also, much more selfishly, I live in north London and the LHR proposals would result in more aircraft routing overhead with minimum heights at 4,000ft rather than 6,000ft today. The additional noise from LHR would be a massive blight on much of London - not just those on the final approach to LHR.