One of the hot local political issues round my way is the expansion of Heathrow Airport, both the just about to open Terminal 5, and the proposed third runway. For the record, I'm agnostic on Terminal 5 in principle and against the third runway, but I have been working on the assumption that as a terminal, Terminal 5 would be pretty cool. After all:

It took 19 years to develop, cost £4.3billion and is supposed to represent the future of air travel.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_article_id=518414&in_page_id=1770

And then you read further, and get to:

But BA has already complained about the facilities at the terminal.

It is unhappy that 45 per cent of the boarding gates will not connect directly to planes along covered walkways. Instead, passengers will have to be bussed to their aircraft.

In documents sent to BAA, the airline says: "This is the lowest share of pier-served stands at any terminal in Heathrow. Two to 2.5million BA passengers per annum will not enjoy pier service."

What? Now I do realise that 45% of gates is not 45% of passengers, but why - in a modern, purpose built terminal - should anyone be getting bussed? I hate bussing. I don't want to stand for ten minutes in a bus while they try to round up the laggards who didn't get to the gate in time. I want to walk straight onto the plain, stow my backpack in the overhead bin, and sit down in my seat to read my book or paper - while they're trying to round up the laggards.

I'm not impressed. Not with BAA for building it, nor with BA for taking 19 years to realise.