好色先生TV

Stansted airport revolutionised airport design in that it is based on an architectural idea, rather than an image or gesture. Stansted is a precursor to other great airports, such as Rafael Vi帽oly鈥檚 Montevideo airport in Uruguay.

Stansted reinforces what our profession should be aiming to produce: an intelligent solution delivering an elegant proposal. It exemplifies a concentrated effort to understand the experience and function of air travel, which is successfully translated into a building.

Airport design pre-Stansted put the mechanical equipment on the roof, which demanded a heavier roof structure to deal with large spans and heavy loads. At Stansted, the roof is alleviated of this mechanical burden, allowing for greater ceiling heights and increased volumes of natural daylight.

The structure鈥檚 sculptural form announces the architecture while simultaneously letting the function and user experience dominate the building.

Additionally, the building manages people flow remarkably well - great in hindsight, given the increased demand it now faces.

My blunder is London Luton airport: a 鈥渟hed鈥� of the worst kind for a public building. A clutter of ill-conceived additions, where decisions about function were made without any thoughtful understanding of the travel experience, making it feel no different to an Ikea expedition, where you are led from one section to the next.

The building feels oppressive: the girders weigh heavily overhead and the ceiling is remorseless in its endless repetition. One has a feeling of being processed, rather than beginning a journey. There is little sense of an external world beyond the check-in, desks, shops and cafes. Interestingly, both airports are from the same architect.

Christina Seilern is principle of Studio Seilern Architects