On Sun, 22 Jan 2017 13:37:46 +0000, Roland Perry
wrote:

In message
-septe
mber.org, at 11:30:53 on Sun, 22 Jan 2017, Recliner
remarked:

They are extremely long escalators.

Not compared to the ones down to the Heathrow T5 transit or the T2
walkways:
https://www.flickr.com/photos/recliner/28105847650/in/album-72157671130714396

Looks about the same to me.

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikiped...ck_North_Termi
nal_escalator_up_to_Pier_6_passenger_bridge.JPG

No, that's clearly much shorter.

fsvo "much" - counting the steps about a third shorter. But why does
greater inconvenience at Heathrow excuse deliberate inconvenience at
Gatwick?

Where's the 'deliberate inconvenience' in Gatwick? Your Bellysian
plan would be far worse, and more expensive to boot.

The current pier 6 works well in Gatwick, and it would be unacceptable
if linked to the end of an already overlong pier by an even longer,
higher bridge than it has now. The only acceptable link to the South
terminal would be an underground shuttle, which is overkill for an 11
gate pier. You also seem to think that the south terminal has enough
spare capacity for another 11 gates. It doesn't.