EDoc

Documentación histórica de edificios

Passenger terminal:
The invention of a building type
Four examples of airport terminal design between 1930 and 1940

Concepción Bibián
July 2010
Passenger Terminal: The invention of a building type EDoc

Contents

1. Introduction
2. First European airports
3. Madrid Barajas
4. Paris Le Bourget
5. Dublin airport
6. Berlin Tempelhof
7. Analysis
8. Conclusions

Bibliography

2
Passenger Terminal: The invention of a building type EDoc

1. Introduction
During the 1930s Europe saw the coming to fruition of early efforts to create a new
sort of building: the airport terminal. Architects and engineers struggled to define
its essential layout and technical demands, as well as its cultural and aesthetic
implications. ¿How did these first designers deal with the invention of a new kind of
architectural type? Several examples of airport terminal will illustrate the successes
and failures of the first mature approaches to this type of building, which was born
at the beginning of the 20th century and has been in constant revision up to the
present time: Madrid-Barajas (1933), Paris-Le Bourget (1937), Dublin-Collinstown
(1940) and Berlin-Tempelhof, (started in 1936, but not operating until 1945).
These are four examples from many other designs of new airports planned in
Europe between 1930 and 1940.

The decade of the 1930s covers a second stage in the evolution of airports, when
bigger airliners, compared with the first commercial aircrafts, allowed more
passengers and the number of operations increased at civil airports. Furthermore,
the growing importance of commercial aviation made airports a matter of official
interest. As a result architectural considerations were taken into account for the
first time, covering more than mere practical requirements. The debate around
airport design moved to a wider audience. Terminals designed in the 1930s started
to look more like sea port terminals or train stations, and less like barracks or
palaces. Rationalism and Modernism were often identified with airport design: the
new kind of building was free from any stylistic links with the past, while aeroplanes
were, without doubt, a major symbol of a modern era of technical achievements.
While airport terminals gained in complexity to manage different flows of
passengers using the terminals simultaneously, they also reflected the ambitions of
their patrons. From this time on, airports developed to become a paradigm of
modern architecture and technological development during the 20th century.
Ultimately, decisions taken at the time of construction caused each airport to
experience different degrees of transformation in adapting to changing demands up
to the present day.

Each one of the examples cited had a different historical and political background,
as well as different real or anticipated air traffic demands. According to the
conditions architects produced contrasting versions of the new type of building.
They show the different scales in airport planning which took place in Europe during
the 1930s, and will give a wide view of how airport design developed under
different circumstances at nearly the same time.

The gigantic project of Tempelhof was meant to be the main air traffic hub in
Europe not only at its time, but in the decades to come. Tempelhof’s architects and
engineers foresaw the complexity and size of future air travel demands. They
understood the airport as a piece of urban architecture and as a key component of
a future imperial capital such as Berlin was to be. This concept was proved to be
wrong for most airports except for Tempelhof itself, although, as will be explained,
due to very particular circumstances. France, another European power in
commercial flight, gave Paris’ airport more humble expectations for the future, but
it still boasts a grandiose scale. These two examples belonged to nations that
launched and ruled commercial aviation up to the World War II, along with Great
Britain and the United States. They linked plans to attract and generate more air
traffic to the role each country could play in the complex European inter-war

3
Passenger Terminal: The invention of a building type EDoc

scenario rather than to any possible economic profit. Under the same parameters
Dublin undertook the construction of a new and large airport which could host the
emerging traffic of transatlantic flights, as well as regular connections with Britain
and the continent. It was designed to give the recently independent Ireland an
important place in European skies, although historical circumstances prevented the
coming to fruition of this plan. Finally, Madrid Barajas airport was planned in a
nation with small opportunities or plans for air conquest, its future role for south
Atlantic flights as yet unexploited. Nevertheless, Madrid needed an airport for its
small but growing traffic, in order to accommodate the select public who was
interested in flying. The first of the four examples to be built, it shows little sign of
its ambitious future development and reflects the limited clientele for early
commercial flights.

2. First european airports

From the beginning of the 20th century aviation was a symbol of progress and
modernity. Exciting and dangerous, flying allowed the reaching of distant or hardly
accessible points faster than ever before. The glamour surrounding the first flying
heroes became a matter of national pride. During World War I military air forces
became decisive weapons for the belligerent countries. Air technology developed
from the first unstable prototypes into effective armed flying machines. Soon after
the war, military bombers were transformed into airliners which allowed flying to
reach the civilian population. The redundant war aviation industry supported an
emerging new market where aircraft construction would continue in demand.1 In
1919 The ICAN (International Commission on Air Navigation) published the first
world agreements to regulate air traffic.2 Doors were opened for the use of air
space for people and freight. Soon regular national and international routes were
established across Europe.3 Those nations who achieved the greatest military air
power during the conflict started a race to dominate European commercial flights.
The terms of the Treaty of Versailles signed in 19194 limited the expansion of
German military air power, despite the great development achieved by the air
industry in Germany during the war. This encouraged the nation to put much effort

1
French aircraft manufacturer Farman created some aero postal services; British Airco/De Havilland
created the Air Transport and Travel Ltd. German AEG launched Luft-Reederei in 1917, which would
become a part of Lufthansa. Voigt, W. in Zukowsky, John (ed.), Building for Air Travel, Architecture and
Design for Commercial Aviation, Munich and New York, Prestel, 1966. p32.

2
For an explanation on the first ICAN agreements and further consequences see: Warner, Edward P.
“International Air Transport” in Foreign Affairs, Vol. 4, No. 2 (Jan., 1926), pp278-293.

3
In 1919 regular lines were established for Berlin-Hamburg and Berlin-Munich, Paris to Bordeaux,
Strasbourg and Brussels, and Toulouse-Casablanca. Paris-London was established in 1921 and soon
became the busiest route with up to six flights per day. Bowdler, Roger [et al.], Berlin Tempelhof,
Liverpool Speke, Paris Le Bourget: airport architecture of the thirties, Paris: Éditions de Patrimoine,
2000, p12.

4
The peace treaty between Germany and the victorious countries was signed on 28 June 1919 in the
palace of Versailles. Germany had to surrender Alsace and Lorraine to France and considerable territory
to the reconstituted Poland. She was not allowed to rearm, and especially naval and air forces were
prohibited. Bombers had to be destroyed, and military airports closed. The Germans had to accept
liability for all war damage and pay ‘reparations’ to the allies. This particularly resented German
economy in the following years. The new League of Nations was also established as an agreement after
the treaty. Cook, Chris, and Stevenson, John, Modern European History, Longman, Harlow, Essex, 1998
(3rd ed.), p243.

4
Passenger Terminal: The invention of a building type EDoc

into developing civilian flights. Meanwhile France and Britain competed for the
establishment and monopoly of international air routes.

The first land bases for these activities were old military or sport aerodromes. A
secure and welcoming space was essential to reassure the passengers before and
after the flight: as many at the time recognized, flying itself was not a pleasant
experience.5 From mere shelters in military airfields, passenger facilities changed to
more sophisticated spaces covering different needs: ticket and passport inspection,
baggage handling and customs checks. Large spaces for waiting were demanded as
delays were frequent due to technical or weather conditions. Restaurants, lounges
and bars attracted visitors to the airfield, who were allowed to view the airport
activity from open-air terraces. This sense of “spectacle” and “leisure” attached to
aviation had a close relationship with early flying experiences and popular shows,
but it was also important at this stage in order to encourage people to fly: air
navigation was still seen as a dangerous and elitist experience.6 Airport designers
met this demand for open views by incorporating wide glass façades in airport halls
and accessible roofs for popular events. Soon, the control of movements on an
airfield became necessary.7 A tower or look-out position was necessary to centralise
the control of these operations, becoming a distinctive part of the new passenger
buildings. Other civil construction appeared on the fringe of military airfields in
order to deal with freight and postal services. Spaces for crews, medical services
and airport staff had to be provided on a permanent basis, either in independent
buildings or within the passenger terminal. Successive enlargements and
modifications transformed the original structures. Little by little, a muddle of
random buildings filled up the surroundings of the apron and the terminal to cover
growing air traffic needs.

The requirements of new bigger aeroplanes also changed, affecting hangars and
airfields. During the war concrete could be used for hangars only in airfields far
from the front line, but in peace time it became more frequent. The new material
allowed big span structures, although at a high price8. It was not until the end of
war-time restriction on the use of iron and steel that metal-frame structures

5
American journalist Lowel Thomas, who made an account of his 1927 trip through European airports,
noted how fellow passengers twitched in their seats and chewed their nails: “Marie Antoinette on her
way to the guillotine was a bluebird for happiness in comparison”. Thomas, Lowel, European Skyways:
the story of a tour of Europe by airplane, Houghton Mifflin Company, Boston, 1927, p22, cited by
Gordon, Alastair, Naked airport, a Cultural History of the World’s most Revolutionary Structure,
University of Chicago Press, Chicago, Ill. 2008, . p43.
Le Corbusier also had comments on aeroplanes discomfort: “before 1930 you vomited in an aeroplane
for two hours, for four hours...It was simply unbearable”. Cited in Bowdler, R. Op. Cit. p22.
A more refined comment came from the other side of the Atlantic: “The psychology of the first-class
railroad terminal is one of inspiring confidence (…) this psychology would be even more desirable at the
airport, where every first-time passenger is more or less nervous”. Arthur, William E. “How shall we
design our airports?” in Scientific American, Oct. 1929, cited in Gordon, A. Op. Cit. p 43.

6
Thomas points that the people waiting in Croydon lounge “came from the first classes”, but there were
also movie stars, journalists on deadline, statesmen, businessmen (most American) as well as some
privileged tourists looking for a thrill. Thomas, L. in Gordon, A. Op. Cit., p17.

7
First flights were assisted by beacons (directional signal), and then by wireless (radio waves). See
Bowdler, R. Op. Cit. p19.

8
An example of this kind of structure is E. Freyssinet’s airships hangars built in Orly, Paris, between
1916 and 1924. With these parabolic arches Freyssinet demonstrated the possibilities of moving
formworks for the casting of in-situ concrete. The Orly hangars became an icon of modernity and
stressed the expressive possibilities of engineering work with concrete structures, as Le Corbusier
pointed in Vers une Architecture in 1923.
See also Kenneth Frampton and Yukio Futagawa. Modern Architecture 1851-1945. p204.
In 1935 P. L. Nervi built a magnificent hangar in precast concrete for the Italian air force in Orvieto. See
Desideri, Paolo. Pier Luigi Nervi, Gustavo Gili, Barcelona 1982.

5
Passenger Terminal: The invention of a building type EDoc

allowed the rapid and economical construction of shelters for planes. These
structures (usually much bigger than the passenger hall) soon became recognisable
landmarks easy to identify from the air. Regular flights demanded better operating
conditions and airfields became more sophisticated, requiring intensive
maintenance. The runways were grass fields, necessarily flat and preferably well
drained, and big enough to allow aircraft take-off in any direction depending on the
wind. Only a small portion of the field, the apron, was paved in concrete or tarmac.
It provided a hard surface for loading and unloading passengers, mail and luggage
close to the building. For economic reasons it was usual only in front of the terminal
and the hangars, so all these facilities had to be located close to each other. To
help orientation a circle 45 meters in diameter marked the airfield, with the name
of the arrival airport in gigantic letters. At the end of the 1920s the most important
airports (among them London Croydon, Amsterdam Schiphol and Berlin Tempelhof)
even had illuminated airfields which allowed for flying at night or in adverse
weather conditions.9

In the decade of the 1930s things changed for airports. The amount of passengers
increased and the number of regular destinations grew. The majority of important
cities in Europe were linked with air services, and some countries such as Britain
and Germany had established a net of municipal airports for domestic flights.10
National flag-carrying companies were founded with official support.11 Aviation had
become a matter of state, and the image airports reflected that of the host cities,
as expressed by the president of the Royal Institute of British Architects in 1937:

“It is a poor advertisement for a nation or a town when a visitor arrives

amid a collection of dilapidated sheds and huts. National and civic pride
demands that the first impression be a good one. The conquest of the
air deserves its monuments, and what could be more appropriate than
that these should form the buildings which serve that achievement?”12

A more practical planning of aviation needs led to the design and construction of
the second generation of commercial airports, which replaced the first improvised
facilities. Governments all over Europe understood the need and importance of
airports as the new entrance gates to modern countries. Architects started to be
involved in airport design teams, rather than just military experts and engineers.
The combination of architectural theories, previous experience and future

9
This is what Reiner Banham called the “pastoral phase” of airport development: all the different
components of an airport gathered in a more or less ordered manner around the control point, leaving
the grass airfield as free as possible as aeroplanes could approach from any direction. When air
navigation became faster and more sophisticated, paved runways limited the aeroplanes movements
and just a fraction of air space had to be controlled. Buildings of every kind could be spread around the
runways, and the planning of airports became impossible. Banham, Reyner, “The obsolescent Airport”,
The Architectural Review. Vol.132, nº 788, Oct. 1962, p. 250-253.

10
See Myerscough, John, “Airport provision in the Inter-War years”, Journal of Contemporary History,
vol. 20, nº 1, Jan. 1985, p. 41-70.

11
Spanish Iberia was founded in 1927, although it stopped activities from 1929 to 1936. See Abejón
Adámez, Manuel, Los aeropuertos españoles: su historia: 1911-1996, AENA, 1996.
Air France was created in 1933 in Le Bourget Airport as it main base of operations See company
information www.corporate.airfrance.com.
Lufthansa was founded in 1926 in Berlin as the association between "Deutsche Aero Lloyd" (DAL) and
"Junkers Luftverkehr", see Zukowsky, J. Op. Cit, p32.
Aer Lings was created in 1936 See Skinner, Liam and Cranitch, Tom (ed.), Ireland and World Aviation.
The Complete Story. Director Publications, Dublin, p85.

12
Percy E. Thomas, president of the Royal Institute of British Architects, in Scholberg, Philip (ed.),
Airports and Airways 1937, Catalogue to the exhibition, London, RIBA, 1937, p6.

6
Passenger Terminal: The invention of a building type EDoc

expectations led to the first mature results in the development of a new generation
of airport terminals.

A big debate was opened in Europe about airport planning and design. Innovations
passed from one country to another as experts were sent to see what was
happening abroad. Germany had developed a net of small municipal airports in the
1920s which caused British to feel at disadvantage.13 A strong campaign was
launched to catch up with Germany. The Royal Institute of British Architects created
an Aerodrome Committee, which would be later transformed in a new Aerodrome
Advisory Board for the Ministry of Transport.14 The RIBA organized a competition
for young architects to design an ideal airport for a metropolis of the size of London
in 1929.15 In 1936 a commission was sent on a study trip around Europe, which
ended in an exhaustive exhibition organized by the RIBA in 1937, Airports and
Airways.16 Ultimately, the net of municipal airports promoted in Great Britain gave
some original examples of small facilities (see Appendix). In France the
architectural and political communities were also active in the matter. An extensive
report on airport types was published by L’Architecture d’Ajourd’Hui in 1936,
followed by reports of new terminals built in Europe in later issues.17 Air navigation
had more and more popular appeal. Some travellers gave accounts of their
experiences across Europe, commenting on airports as the first impression of their
host countries.18

The increase in weight of commercial aircraft made them less vulnerable to

predominant winds, but demanded harder surfaces for take-off and landing.19
Paved runways had been standard in North America since 1928, while in Europe the
first airport to enjoy this equipment was Bromma, near Stockholm, in 1935. A few
others followed before the outbreak of World War II.20 Often busy aeroplanes had
to await passengers with motors running, and they could no longer be in positions
very close to the terminal. Thus airport designers and operators faced the need to
connect terminal and aeroplanes in a safe and comfortable way for passengers and
freight, producing some original solutions. On the other hand, once just a smaller

13
The Cabinet Committee on the future of British commercial transport expressed how far Britain lagged
behind continental developments:
“The fertilising influence of a stream of subsides which, even in those countries whose
finances are more strained, are being largely augmented from year to year… if we are not
to be left hopelessly behind in one of the most striking departments of twentieth-century
progress, some modification of policy is essential”.
PRO AVIA 2/1846S. Hoar, Future of British Commercial Airports, 6 October 1927. Cited in Meyerscourt,
J. Op. cit. p48.

14
Meyerscourt, J. Op. Cit. p50.

15
See “RIBA Aerodrome Competition” The Architect’s Journal nº69, Jan 1929, pp208-211, and “RIBA
Competition for the design of an Aerodrome” Journal of the Royal Institute of British Architects 36, nº8
Feb. 1929, pp325-326. Voight, W. in Zukowsky, J. Op. Cit. p 43.

16
RAF squadron leader Nigel Norman and architect Graham Dawbam made a tour around the world
airports and published a report suggesting ways to modernize British airports. As a part of their mission,
they organised the influential exhibition held in 1937. See Gordon, A. Op. Cit. p82.

17
L’Architecture d’Ajourd’Hui nº 3, 1936, nº8,nº9, 1937

18
French writer Antoine de Saint-Exúpery was an expert pilot who widely reported about the experience
of flying. See L’aviateur (1926), Vol de Nuit (1931), or Pilote de Guerre (1942). Other occasional
travellers gave literary references of airports. In England Made Me (1935) Graham Greene describes a
business man who knows perfectly most of European airports.

19
The average increase was from 10 tons in 1927 to 20 in 1937. Voigt, W. in Zukoswky, J. Op. Cit. p44.

20
Voigt, W. in Zukoswky, J. Op. Cit. p44.

7
Passenger Terminal: The invention of a building type EDoc

portion of sky above the terminal needed to be controlled, airport equipments such
as hangars or control towers could be relocated more freely around the airfield. This
was the beginning of the modern airport layout. Eventually the limits of the first
facilities became clear as most airports demanded further enlargement. However
many of them could not be expanded because their edges had been cluttered by
hangars or other structures, or because they were too close to centres of
population. The optimal location of airports became another subject of debate.

Modern airport terminals in the 1930s had to face substantial changes compared
with their predecessors: security requirements as we understand them today were
not an issue, but the number of passengers travelling obliged for the first time the
separation of the different flows as a critical factor in airport design: arrivals and
departures areas, or several boarding gates being used simultaneously for different
flights. As airlines reached further destinations, customs and sanitary controls had
to be provided on a routine basis within the arrivals area. In order to generate
some income to support them, airports usually offered attractions open to the
general public such as air shows or luxury restaurants with ample views over the
airfield. Another issue that airport planners had to consider was the land connection
with the cities they served. Punctuality and efficiency were the goals of air
transportation to compete with the more comfortable option of trains or ships.
Finally, different sizes of airports were planned, considering that “not every
commercial aerodrome will have to accommodate (transatlantic) journeys, and
aerodromes that do this are not expected to be numerous.”21

The four examples of airport terminals compared here were conceived during this
decade of changes and experimentation. They were designed and built in a climate
of technical innovation and architectural debate, as well as political and economic
struggles. For every one of them particular circumstances shaped the final results
and opened different possibilities for further development. These will be explained
for each case in particular, and some conclusions will be extracted to analyse how
architecture developed in the early stages of airport design.

3. Madrid Barajas
The airport of Madrid-Barajas was built at the beginning of the 1930s as a logical
consequence of the slow, but consistent, development of commercial aviation in
Spain. The capital did not have a proper aerodrome to host the growing air
industry, and the transformation of existing military airfields seemed problematical.
So the airport was built from scratch, initially promoted by local authorities. It was
in competition with other regional initiatives around the country, but the
geographical advantages of Madrid, and its position as capital, allowed its further
development as the main air hub in the Peninsula. The architecture of the first
passenger building reflects the initial motivation to enter the modern era, on a par
with other European countries, although within practical limits. The spread of
Modernism across Europe met the need of a new aesthetic expression for aviation
buildings. The airport in Barajas was shaped and sized for the contemporary needs
of early commercial aviation, when just a few could afford to fly in quite small
aeroplanes. The later evolution of Madrid as an international hub connecting with
South America would drastically outdate the first aspirations of Barajas. All too

21
Lieut.-Colonel Sir Francis Shelmerdine, Director-General of Civil Aviation, in Scholberg, P. Op. Cit. p11.

8
Passenger Terminal: The invention of a building type EDoc

soon the demands of the new air industry made the original building obsolete and it
was replaced by bigger and more modern ones.

Interest in flying in Spain had seen some early experiments in light flying devices
and balloon flights before the beginning of the 20th century.22 However, as Spain
was not involved in the First World War, the development of aeroplanes “heavier
than air” did not see the same evolution as in central Europe and Britain. As
explained in the introduction, the ICAN published in 1919 the first world agreement
to regulate the air traffic, setting the standards for the beginning of commercial
aviation. The agreement reflected directly the political situation in Europe after the
war, including the sanctions on Germany prescribed by the Treaty of Versailles. The
limitation on Germany developing its air force was extended in practical terms to
the non-belligerent nations, including Spain.23 This meant that these countries
would be unable to develop their flying potential, allowing England and France to
appropriate the commercial exploitation of air traffic. France especially was eager to
build a monopoly of commercial and postal air lines connecting with Northern Africa
(Tunisia and Morocco). These flights needed to use Spanish air space, and some
intermediate stops were established along the East coast of Spain. Some
aerodromes were developed in this corridor, earlier than in central areas of the
country or the islands.24 The French company Làte Coère started postal air services
in Spain using first the same routes used to the colonies, and later on opening new
connections within the Peninsula and the Spanish islands.25

By the end of the 1920s commercial air services were well established and a
number of small airports had been developed by local authorities, using public
funds but with a certain degree of independence. Many of them were military or
sport fields changed to commercial use. However, in 1929 the dictatorship of Primo
de Rivera (1923-30) extended its plans for state monopolies to commercial air
services, creating a Central Board and abolishing all the local boards except those
in Catalonia. It was the beginning of current the AENA, the national airport
authority. In its campaign to catch up with France and Britain, Germany launched
companies such as Luft-Hansa and Junkers who were directly involved in the
creation of the first Spanish air companies, Iberia and UAE respectively, in 1927.26
While still under the promotion of the Local Airport Board, Madrid considered the
creation of a new civil airport in 1929.27 Getafe military base, the main airfield close
to Madrid, was too small to accommodate commercial flights, so the local board
supported the creation of a new airport independent from military use. Some sites
were proposed, and finally Barajas was selected for practical reasons, including the
price of the properties tendered. After the purchase of land, a competition was
launched in July 1929 for the design of the new airport.28

22
First balloon was launched in Spain in 1793, after ten years of Montgolfier Brothers’ in France. The
first aeroplane flight in Spain was in 1909. See Utrilla, L. and García Cruzado, M. Historia de los
aeropuertos de Madrid, AENA, Madrid 2005, volume 2, pp201-103.
23
The agreement involved that any airplane had the right to fly above any country, and make technical
stops where needed. See Warner, Edward P. Op. Cit, p280. On consequences of the agreement for
Spain, see Utrilla, L. Ibid, Vol 1, p31.

24
See map of air routes flying from Paris as early as 1921, Inizan, C, in Bowdler, R. Op. Cit, fig.1, p109.

25
Utrilla, L. Op. Cit. Vol. 1, p31.
26
Abejón Adámez, M. Op. Cit. p38.

27
Madrid Airport Executive Commission bulletin nº87, 28 march 1929. Cited in Abejón Adámez, M. Op.
Cit. p225.

28
Abejón Adámez, M. Op. Cit. p225.

9
Passenger Terminal: The invention of a building type EDoc

The competition included the whole design of the airport facilities: airfield, hangars
and space for aircraft maintenance, terminal and passenger facilities, a medical
centre, accommodation for the airport staff, energy supply, road access and urban
design.29 It was one of the few occasions where a civil aerodrome was planned de
novo. All the proposals submitted showed a very modern approach to the design of
airport terminal, even when Modernism was not very popular yet among the
architects of pre Republican Spain.30 Just a few young architects had showed
interest in the new style, but the opportunities to display convincing results had not
been numerous.31 However, for this brief the identification of aviation with
modernity was straightforwardly translated to the image that the new airport would
transmit, and all the designs stuck to this ideal. The proposals for the plan of the
airport were very much up to date in relation to other European airports, including
the airfield design and other facilities. One the terminal designs, by Carrascosa and
Gimenez, was directly inspired by London’s Croydon in plan. Croydon had been
opened in 1923 and was praised as the most sophisticated of its time.32 The design
submitted by Casto Fernandez Shaw, perhaps the most visionary architect of the
early Spanish Avant-Garde,33 was remarkable (see ill. 4.1). The control tower was
an eight storey structure, in the fashion of a huge maritime light house displaying
all the technological paraphernalia associated with air communication. The futuristic
image of the terminal was very close to Mendelssohn's early exercise from 1914.34
However the proposal was not favored by the jury; they understood that its excess
of originality could compromise the practicality of the complex, as well as causing
increases in the final cost of the airport.35 The proposal finally chosen was the one
from Luis Gutierrez Soto (1890-1977), although some modifications were done for
the final version built. Gutierrez Soto's project for the terminal was simpler than the
other entries. Compared with Fernandez Shaw's, it was much less visionary and
ambitious in terms of the future development of aviation possibilities. The size of
the terminal reflected the real capacities necessary at the time, with all the
elements attached to a single structure: terminal, control tower and passenger
boarding facilities, all in a very simple layout. However, it was a building difficult to
enlarge without major changes to the basic plan. While it was still an original design

29
The entries for the competition were:
Arch. Blanco Solar, Bergamín and eng. Levenfelt
Arch. Luis Gutiérrez Soto and Eng. Marqués de los Álamos
Arch. Casto Fernández Shaw, and Eng. Rogelio Sol
Arch. Francisco Massot
Eng. Ernesto Ramis Matas
Engineers Giménez and Carrascosa
See Arquitectura, nº129, 1930, pp 13-28.

30
Chueca Goitia, Fernando, Arquitectura de Madrid, siglo XX, Ed.Tanais, Madrid, 1999, p27.

31
This was the group later called “the 1925 generation”, who included further relevant names in Modern
Architecture such as Casto Fernandez Shaw or Fernando Garcia Mercadal. For an appreciation of how
Modern Architecture was developing in Spain at the end of the 1920s see Giedion, Sigfried, “La
arquitectura contemporánea en España” in Cahiers d’Art, no. 3, 1931, pp.157-164

32
The passenger terminal at Croydon was mentioned at the RIBA Exhibition catalogue, and many of its
technical devices were cited as examples of aeronautical development, including a model of the airport
clock. See Scholberg, P. Op. Cit. p81.

33
Chueca Goitia, F. Op. Cit. p62.

34
See fig. 4 from Voigt W. in Zukowsky, J. p30.

35
"...adolece de un exceso de originalidad, sujetando a las formas simbólicas de los edificios las
necesidades de los servicios en ellos instalados, que podría ser recomendable para otro género de
edificaciones de menos coste que las de un aeropuerto de esta magnitud, pero que en el caso presente
consideramos que acarrearía gastos innecesarios y el riesgo de no proporcionar el rendimiento que los
autores esperan." Utrilla, L. Op. Cit. p113

10
Passenger Terminal: The invention of a building type EDoc

it might have been much easier for the Airport Board to assimilate than the
alternatives presented.

The architect of the first Madrid-Barajas terminal showed a great ability to adapt to
the changes in tastes (and politics) occurring in the Spain of the first half of the
century.36 His modernistic design for Barajas terminal and other lesser buildings
contrasts with his later design for Malaga Airport (a kind of regionalist version of
modernity), and still more with the Spanish baroque revival of his new Ministry of
Aviation finished in 1940. He became the unofficial architect of Madrid’s bourgeoisie
in the 1940s and 50s, and with his extensive work helped to shape the city in its
first steps towards modernity. He also was involved in the development of another
new type of building which was born in the 20th century: cinemas.37

Soon after the airfield was laid out, Barajas started to be used for commercial
flights, even without a proper terminal building. The airfield was ready to operate in
1931, and the building was inaugurated in 1933.38 During the construction process,
the Local Airport Board was dissolved when the General Aviation Board was created
(1931)39, following the centralizing efforts of the new Republican government. Even
under the supervision of a larger organization, the perspective for the development
of Madrid’s airport was kept small.

The passenger terminal reproduces the typical plan of the first experiments in
airport design. A single level for all public needs was overlooked by a gallery giving
access to offices and private spaces. The double height space created at the
entrance was reduced in area, but in accordance with the scale of the building.
Restaurant and lounge areas looked towards the apron through wide glass façades.
The control tower stood out the building outline on the third level, very much in the
fashion of maritime buildings. This resemblance to ship aesthetics was reinforced by
the transparent handrails lining the open terraces in the upper levels, and by the
round windows at the lower floor. Maybe the most original feature of the building
was the concrete canopy that protected passengers walking towards the apron,
reinforcing the idea of comfort for the select customers (see ills. 4.2. and 4.3.). The
building reflects the small impact that aviation had initially in Spain, and how it was
an elitist experience with little possibility of being extended to a wider public.40

At the end of the decade civil war raged across the country. The Spanish Civil War
was of sufficient length (1936-1939), that a certain degree of “normality” was
achieved in many aspects of civilian life, including at Madrid’s airport. This allowed
postal and commercial air services to continue with French and German companies.

36
In 1929 the Spanish king Alfonso XIII tried to bring back a democratic regime, after six years of
dictatorship with military backing. In 1931, the first democratic local elections showed minimal support
for the monarchy. Popular revolts spread all over the country and the king fled to France. The Second
Spanish Republic was proclaimed on 14 April 1931. Social and economic reforms were undertaken, but
never went as far as expected. General discontent ended in new riots. In 1936 a military uprising ended
in a civil war lasting the following three years. The military side won the conflict, and General Francisco
Franco governed as a dictator until 1975. Vilar, Pierre. Historia de España, Critica, Barcelona, 1989, 27th
ed.

37
De Miguel, Carlos, La obra de Luis Gutierrez Soto, COAM, Madrid 1978.

38
Utrilla, L. Op. Cit. p234.

39
Utrilla, L. Op. Cit. p114.
40
A private aero-club was built alongside the hangars and the main passenger building, while the main
Spanish companies at that time (Iberia and LAPE) established their base in Barajas too. This gives a
measure of the scale of air movement in Madrid in the 1930s. See Utrilla, L. Op. Cit. p224.

11
Passenger Terminal: The invention of a building type EDoc

The two different sides confronted had established air force settlements out of
Madrid, as the airport was too small for military activity. Once the Nationalist side
defeated Republicans in Madrid (March 1939), air force units from Germany used
41
Barajas as their base. The conditions for flying after the civil war (with most
European countries in conflict and a shortage of fuel) nearly paralysed activity by
1943. In 1944 the first paved runway was inaugurated, although it was not used
42
until 1947. However, when flying became more popular and the small original
building needed an update, bigger plans were developed for the airport: a brand
new terminal was built in 1953, and the old one was finally demolished in the early
1980s.43

4. Paris Le Bourget
The Paris-Le Bourget terminal built in 1937 was launched as a model for its
contemporaries, even though it contained few innovations. It had been the first
European commercial airport, and the busiest until Tempelhof surpassed it in the
early 1930s. The excitement surrounding Le Bourget was crystallised with
Lindberg’s landing there after his first transatlantic flight in 1927. It was felt to
deserve a monument on a par with the expectations of the France, both modern
and big. The prospect of the International Exhibition to be held in Paris in 1937
made the French Air Ministry take the lead in the renovation of the existing, but
now obsolete, facilities at Le Bourget. The new airport should be big enough to
accommodate the visitors expected to arrive in Paris, but it also had to prove the
preeminent role of the French air industry in competition with other European
nations, especially Britain and Germany. The display of progress in aviation was
linked to the other technical achievements of the host country which would be on
show at the exhibition organized in central Paris. When opened, the new airport
building was warmly welcomed by the architectural community, and in general it
was admired for its rationality and its unaccustomed size.44 As did other buildings of
its kind, it soon became an icon of modernity for France and its capital.
Nevertheless, there is little innovation in the building, and it barely reflects the
evolution and the growing complexity occurring in aviation in the decade of the
1930s. The rigid original scheme imposed by the airport planners prevented the
designers from looking towards the future, and the limitations of space did not
allow further enlargement. Other contemporary airports, less renowned, were able
to foresee changing conditions in the short term, or experiment with more
innovative solutions, whereas Le Bourget soon found its limitations. These
disadvantages led on the one hand to the decrease of commercial operations in
Bourget after the World War II, but on the other hand to the preservation of the
original building.

41
Utrilla, L, Op. Cit. p223

42
Utrilla, L, Op. Cit. p225

43
Utrilla, L, Op. Cit. P232

44
The design was published by French press soon after the inauguration. The interest showed by the
architectural press reflects the open debate emerging around this kind of building. See L’Architecture
d’Ajourd’Hui nº 3, 1936. It was also showed in London at the RIBA exhibition in 1937, exceptionally as a
model before it was completely finished. See Scholberg, P. Op. Cit. p44.

12
Passenger Terminal: The invention of a building type EDoc

The history of this airport developed, as with many others, from a military field. The
original airforce facilities at Le Bourget are just 12 km far form Paris. This
convenient location allowed it to become the first commercial airport in Paris and
the main aerial entrance to France during the first half of the 20th century. It
started operations in 1914, used in order to protect the capital against German
bombers during the First World War. A few months after the Armistice, the airfield
was used for the first commercial flights between Paris and London.45 In 1919 Le
Bourget was designated as the country’s first airport.46 This meant that the existing
facilities to accommodate passengers and aircraft maintenance had to be drastically
transformed. The new airport complex, opened in 1924, comprised two rows of
hangars separated by a group of several pavilions arranged around a garden. Each
pavilion served a different function: administration, passport and customs control, a
restaurant, meteorological and telegraphic service, a centre for medical
examinations and a house for the airport commander.47 This scheme (hangars at
both sides of the central terminal) was quite common in early European airports, as
was the use of several buildings for different purposes (see ills. 5.1. and 5.2.).

During the 1920s Le Bourget became a national icon. Its air traffic increased, both
passengers and freight, and by the end of the decade all the original hangars had
been enlarged.48 In 1927 American aviator Charles Lindberg achieved the first
nonstop flight from New York to Paris. After fourteen hours in his aircraft Lindberg
landed at Le Bourget, contributing to its legendary aeronautical history. In 1933 the
airline company Air France was created there,49 and as happened with all flag
carrier companies, it became a symbol of national pride. In 1935 the Air Ministry
decided to maintain Le Bourget as the definitive site for the main Paris Airport.50
Despite being a relatively short distance from the capital, the improvement of the
road linking with Paris was delayed, and communication with the airport continued
to be difficult at that time.51 With the 1937 Paris International Exhibition in mind,
the Ministry decided to remodel the existing facility rather than undertake the
construction of a new one with more ambitious targets. A competition was launched
for the design of the new terminal building, which had to be on time for the
inauguration of the Exhibition in May 1937. The theme of the exposition was “Art
and Technology in Modern Life”, which connected perfectly with the ethos of
modern aviation and the contemporary debate about the construction of airports.
Because of the haste to be on time for the big event in Paris, the new building had
to deal with the pre-existing scheme of hangars at both ends of a group of separate
pavilions. All these existing buildings had been randomly enlarged and transformed
during the 1930s as the airport’s air traffic intensified. The general aspect of the
main entrance to France was that of something shabby and obsolete: The new Le
Bourget had to be in tune with modern times.

45
This was the first commercial route established in Europe. See Inizan, C. in Bowdler, R. Op. Cit. p106

46
It was then that the word “aeroport” was firstly used in French, and from there translated and
incorporated definitively in different languages to designate these facilities. See Voight,W. in Zukowsky,
J. Op. cit. p32.

47
Inizan, C. in Bowdler, R. Op. Cit. p107

48
Inizan, C. in Bowdler, R. Op. Cit. p109

49
See note 11.

50
Inizan, C. in Bowdler, R. Op. Cit. p107.

51
The motorway (Autoroute du Nord) was not in fact built until after the Second World War. Inizan, C. in
Bowdler, R. Op. Cit. p107.

13
Passenger Terminal: The invention of a building type EDoc

Different innovative proposals were submitted from renowned French architects.

But ahead of these, the successful design was measured in size and budget, and
adapted very carefully to the existing buildings.52 It summarized the practicality
usually prescribed for public buildings, as well as the functional requirements
demanded in airports. The author, Architect Georges Labro, had worked for the
French postal administration since 1928, so he was familiar with the development
of public buildings.53 The concrete structure he proposed was modulated in regular
spans parallel to the apron. Thus it could be easily enlarged if required by the
simple addition of extra bays (although to do this, the neighbour hangars would
have had to be demolished). In the centre of the composition a vertical surface
projected from the façade to divide departures from arrivals on the land side. The
main hall was lined by galleries in two levels, giving open access to the various
facilities. The south side of the building hosts the customs and cargo services,
baggage handling and technical support offices at several levels. The north side is
reserved for passengers and airline companies, a post office, a restaurant and even
an hotel.54 The control tower projects to the apron, like the prow of a ship, very
much in the common fashion which allied aerodromes with the aesthetics of port
terminals (see ill. 5.7.). Three railed terraces facing the airfield on either side
offered the general public the possibility of enjoying the spectacle of flying, even
when they could not afford be part of it.55 The elongated rows of windows opening
to the airfield reinforced the connection with the aesthetics of ships and seaports.
The gleaming new terminal had a 233 meter-long façade of glass. Its hyper-
extended length and translucency echoed the theme of the exposition and created
a monumental sense of arrival.56 Despite the efforts to finish the building on time,
the inauguration was late for the exhibition when it opened on 12th November 1937
(see ill. 5.3 and 5.6.).

Although the airport brought little innovation to airport terminal design, it reflected
the current taste which linked air and sea ports in aesthetics, including the
straightforward identification of the control tower with a sea light. The common use
of wide open windows and terraces to contemplate the exciting spectacle of flying
reinforced this aesthetic. The main hall connecting with upper levels through open
staircases was probably the most influential feature of the building. It gives a sense
of one single space hosting multiple functions, and tells us something about the real
size and complexity of the building. Le Bourget’s architect’s practical sense foresaw
the possible growth of the building, and prepared it for future changes. To achieve
this, Labro projected a modular structure covered with concrete vaults, which could
be repeated as often as required. However, although the building was big enough
to deal with existing and future demands, it was too long for a repetitive structure.
The airside façade gives a sense of boredom, hardly alleviated by the central point
of the composition at the projecting control tower.

When the Second World War started, Le Bourget suffered bombing attacks
beginning in 1940. It was turned into a German Luftwaffe’s base during the Battle
of Britain, which caused the enlargement of the airfield and the construction of two
concrete runways.57 After the Germans left in 1944, Aéroports de Paris58 undertook

52
Inizan, C. in Bowdler, R. Op. Cit. p113.

53
Inizan, C. in Bowdler, R. Op. Cit. p113.

54
Inizan, C. in Bowdler, R. Op. Cit. p112.
55
Inizan, C. in Bowdler, R. Op. Cit. pp113-p114.

56
Gordon, A. Op. Cit. p81.

57
Inizan, C. in Bowdler, R. Op. Cit. p116

14
Passenger Terminal: The invention of a building type EDoc

the reconstruction of the building, again commissioning Georges Labro for the job.
In 1953 a new control tower was built, separated from the passenger terminal.59
The evolution of commercial aviation brought larger, faster and more frequent
flights to Paris. The capacities of Le Bourget were soon exceeded, and because of
its location and the construction around it, it could not grow bigger. Commercial
traffic was progressively transferred to the second Paris airport, Orly60, which was
better placed to deal with future space demands. In 1977 Le Bourget was closed for
commercial flights, and today operates mainly for private/business services.61
Labro’s terminal and some of the first hangars are now transformed into an air and
space museum.

5. Dublin Airport
Collinstown Airport, later named Dublin Airport, was built in 1939 under particular
political circumstances. On one hand, the young Irish republic wanted to mark her
place on the new European political map by assuring communications with Britain
and the continent. On the other, she intended to equal Europe in the development
of civil aviation as a must for modern nations. Ireland also enjoyed a privileged
position for the first north transatlantic flights. Consequently a stunning new airport
was built, forecasting the importance that commercial flights would have in the
future. The enthusiasm of the young architect in charge shaped the airport terminal
in state-of-the-art Modernistic style (see ills. 6.1. and 6.2.). However, the Irish
initiative coincided with the outbreak of World War II, and the airport could not
prove its worth until a new period of peace arrived. Unfortunately aviation had
largely evolved again by then, due to the impulse of military necessity, and Dublin’s
airport terminal was soon rendered obsolete.

Commercial flights from Ireland were first established in Baldonnel Aerodrome, the
now Irish Air Corps base close to Dublin, in the early 1930’s. The Irish national air
company, Aer Lingus, started operations in Baldonnel in 1936 after some basic
arrangements for passenger and crew facilities were made. Flights from Dublin
would initially operate between Ireland and Britain in conjunction with Blackpool
and West Coast Air Services.62 However, Baldonnel proved difficult to run with civil
and military operations in parallel, and other sites were discussed for a commercial
airport for Dublin. Dublin’s influential mayor, Alfred Byrne63, suggested Collinstown,
which was finally designated. This site seemed more suitable for aviation, far from
the mountains and with clear approaches from every direction. It also offered
better prospects for future expansion. Collinstown had operated as a military base

58
Áeroports de Paris (ADP) is a public corporation created in 1945 to run the airports of the Paris region.
59
Inizan, C. in Bowdler, R. Op. Cit. p116.
60
Orly airport operated as secondary airport since 1932. Before that the airfield had served as military
point and airship port. In 1917 Eugene Freyssinet built there his revolutionary airship hangars made in
concrete. Voight, W, in Zukowsky, J. Op. Cit. p37.

61
Inizan, C. in Bowdler, R. Op. Cit. p118
62
Oram, Hugh, Dublin Airport, the history. Aer Rianta, Dublin 1990, pp 25-27.

63
Alfred (Alfie) Byrne (1882-1956) was Lord Mayor of Dublin from 1930–1939 and 1954–1955. He was
for different reasons a relevant figure in Dublin’s urban development. He was also an MP in the House of
Commons of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland and a Teachta Dála in Dáil Éireann.
Official site of the Oireachtas: www.oireachtas.ie.

15
Passenger Terminal: The invention of a building type EDoc

for the British Royal Flying Corps during World War I and for the Royal Air Force
until Ireland gained independence.

In 1935 an inter-governmental agreement was signed between Ireland, Canada,

the United Kingdom and the United States for the provision of facilities for trans-
Atlantic air services, establishing that all north transatlantic flights would stop in
Ireland.64 The two companies operating trans-Atlantic flights then were Imperial
Airways and Pan American Airways. Their seaplanes could operate from the flying-
boat port of Foynes in the Irish west coast. However, soon after the agreement
they announced that the development of land-based aircraft was moving faster
than expected. Shannon Airport in the west coast was designated to host these
flights, but it was still under construction and Collinstown had to urgently provide
some temporary facilities.65 The state company Aer Rianta was established in the
same year to control shares in the company responsible for the running of the
trans-Atlantic services. It was also committed to the development of commercial
aviation in Ireland, including the control of Aer Lingus66.

The design of the passenger terminal was awarded to a young architect who later
would become an important figure in Irish architecture, Desmond Fitzgerald.67 He
worked within the team of the Office of Public Works in charge of the design and
construction of the new airport. Fitzgerald had studied for a short period in London,
and might well have visited the London RIBA exhibition on airport design organised
in 1937.68 We know that he investigated the subject of airport design through
French issues of French magazine L’Architecture d’Aujourd’hui.69 All these clues
gave him a good idea of how to handle the commission for the new architectural
icon of the country. How Fitzgerald or others on the design team managed to
persuade the OPW to undertake the construction of a building of Dublin’s size is
difficult to know.70 The country was in adverse economical circumstances, and an
austerity plan had been imposed by the government. The young republic was
struggling with the consequences of its own financial policies,71 while the tone of
European politics announced the possible arrival of new conflicts on the continent.

In 1937 work started in the airfield, after the necessary land acquisitions. The old
RAF hangar and adjacent buildings in disuse were demolished.72 At the beginning of
1938, plans for the terminal building and hangar were completed and tenders

64
The agreement between Canada, UK and USA was signed in Ottawa in December 1935, where Irish
delegates were present. See Skinner, L. and Cranitch, T. Op. Cit. p43.

65
Oram, H. Op. Cit. p32.

66
Oram, H. Op. Cit p34. See also Skinner, L. Op. Cit. p85.

67
Desmond Fitzgerald (1910-1897) graduated at University College Dublin, and held the chair of
architecture at the same university between 1954 and 1973. He was responsible for the design of some
other modern buildings in Dublin, although with much less popular appeal. See McDonald, Frank, The
Destruction of Dublin, Gill and Macmillan, Dublin 1985, p35.

68
Rothery, Sean, Ireland and the new architecture. 1900-1940, The Lilliput Press 1991, p214.

69
See Desmond Fitzgerald papers at the Irish Architectural Archives.

70
On the controversy about Fitzgerald’s appointment and his real involvement in the airport design see
Rothery, S. Op. Cit. p214-215.

71
Things were especially hard for Ireland after the trade war started against Britain (1932-38) and the
autarchic inclinations of the Republic’s first Prime Minister, Eamon de Valera. See Douglas, Roy, Ireland
since 1690, The Blackstaff Press, Belfast 1999, p116-120.

72
Oram, H: Op. Cit. p35.

16
Passenger Terminal: The invention of a building type EDoc

invited. The airport was operative from January 1940.73 However, the war-time
conditions obliged very modest official opening ceremonies.74 During the following
six years the airport had a quiet existence, as World War II raged across Europe.
Although Irish Free State had declared itself neutral in late 1939,75 increasing
restrictions in commercial aviation due to war conditions affected the island. Aer
Lingus only operated a service to Liverpool, which passed from one daily to two
weekly flights in 1941, and to suspension in 1944 as D day approached.76 Any other
private flights were banned, and airfields were obstructed to avoid its use by
potential invaders (England or Germany) during the Emergency.77 The Irish Army
moved into Collinstown’s improved facilities and stayed there until the end of the
war.78

Finally in 1945 the war ended and Dublin Airport started to equip itself for times of
peace. Experts all over the world forecasted an enormous upsurge in civil aviation.
In Ireland, Dublin’s Collinstown airport and passenger facilities were finally
celebrated by the Irish press, showing proudly an achievement of five years before.
Fitzgerald was awarded a medal by the Royal Institute of Architects of Ireland79 for
the design of the terminal. Dublin Airport became an icon of modernization and
progress in the nation.80

The development of aeroplanes obliged the paving of the runways with concrete in
1948.81 Soon, bigger airliners would bring more passengers, and the existing
facilities had to be enlarged. Fortunately in Dublin the new spaces required were
planned as new buildings instead of successive transformations of the original one.
The interior of old terminal was altered to host more office space, although without
changes in the exterior. The only visible addition to the building was the new
control position built in 1951 on top of the existing.82 This respect shown towards
the original site of the airport development guaranteed its preservation.

6. Berlin Tempelhof
Berlin-Tempelhof could have been a paradigm of Nazi megalomania but instead it
became the exemplification of the failure of Hitler’s dream. The largest building of
any kind at its time was useless for Nazi Germany and became a symbol for Free
Europe. Beside the historical facts, the importance of the building in the exploration
of the design of airport terminals is unarguable, as it anticipated the size and

73
Oram, H, Op. Cit. p39. Skinner, L. Op. cit. p85.

74
Oram, H. Op. Cit. p39.

75
Douglas, R, Op. Cit. p119.

76
Skinner, L. Op. Cit. p85.

77
Oram, H. Op. Cit. p41.

78
Oram, H. Op. cit. p43.

79
RIAI yearbook 1945. Irish Architectural Archives.

80
Irish Weekly Independent, 6Oct. 1945. The Irish Builder, 28 July 1945.

81
Oram, H. Op. Cit. p68

82
Dating from pictures published by Oram, H. Op. Cit. p105

17
Passenger Terminal: The invention of a building type EDoc

characteristic complexity of further generations of airports. The most important

accomplishment of its visionary design is the fact that it remained active for nearly
70 years without major changes. It is probably the only airport of its size which
escaped for so long from obsolescence, even considering its odd position in the
middle of Berlin.

As explained in the introductory chapter, Germany had to face the restrictions on

air force development imposed by the Treaty of Versailles after the World War I.
Wartime bombers had to be destroyed or delivered to the Allied countries, as were
military airships.83 Although the Treaty did not mention civil aviation directly,84 the
fact was that the development of commercial flights was delayed in comparison
with France or Great Britain. To catch up other European air powers the German air
industry was transformed to deliver the most advanced airliners. In three years
Luft-Hansa, created in 1926 by the amalgamation of several existing companies,
was logging more miles than all other European airlines together.85 Every new
airport, every new air route was seen as a new victory in this race, after the
humiliation following the war. This political interest in air industry was supported by
numerous popular air shows.86 Germany became the main European hub for
national and international routes whereas Britain and France concentrated their
efforts to communicate with their distant colonies. The number of passengers using
Tempelhof increased from 32,000 a year in 1926 to more than 200,000 in 193687 ,
which converted Berlin’s airport into the busiest in Europe.

Tempelhof was a former sport airfield and before that a popular spot for Berliner’s
outdoor leisure. Between 1926 and 1929 the architects Paul and Klaus Enger had
built the first passenger terminal in Tempelhof.88 The whole airport was praised as
dignified and efficient, and the terminal building was widely admired for its
rationality. Its size was remarkable large.89 A net of municipal airports promoted by
German government to link all medium-size cities gave other good examples of
terminal designs, such as the new terminal at Königsberg (East Prussia, today
Kaliningrad) finished in 1922, and Fuhlsbüttel airport, near Hamburg operating in
1929 (see appendix).

Air conquest had become a matter or national pride in Germany during the 1930s,
but soon things went even further. The National Socialist party, in power from
1933, linked the development of aviation to the fascist ideal of progress and

83
For a full text and further annotations of the Treaty of Versailles see United States. Department of
State, The Paris Peace Conference, 1919, U.S. Govt. Print. Off, Washington 1942-47.

84
Versailles Treaty. US Department of State, Ibid. section III, Air Clauses.

85
Schmidt, Peter, A Nation of Flyers: German Aviation and the Popular Imagination, Harvard University
Press, Cambridge, Mass. 1992, cited in Gordon, A. Op. Cit. p19.

86
These activities played a big role in the financial support of the facilities, many times too big for the
real traffic demands. Smith, P. in Bowdler, R. p22. On the economic and symbolic importance of air
shows for German see Schmidt, P. Ibid. p135.

87
Dolff-Bonekämper, Gabi, in Bowdler, R. Op. Cit. p51.
88
Actually, the first permanent facility at Tempelhof was built in 1922, after the airfield was levelled for
use as an airfield. It comprised hangars and workshops as well as passengers and crew services. See
Dolf-Bonekämper, G. in Bowdler, R. Op. Cit. p50.

89
It was included in the RIBA exhibition held in 1937, and described in its catalogue as very efficient and
sober. See Airports and Airways, p35. Lowell Thomas also praised it as “the best commercial aerodrome
in the world”. See Gordon, A, p19. More recently, Architect Norman Foster praised the building as “the
mother of all airports”, although this citation has mistakenly related with further Nazi airport. See
Demps, Flughaffen Tempelhof, p62, cited in Pascoe, D. Op. Cit. p158.

18
Passenger Terminal: The invention of a building type EDoc

military order.90 Hitler immediately foresaw the propaganda value of aviation: it

was both modern and mythic, two conditions he wanted to identify with in the new
German nation-to-be-born.91 Hitler managed to take advantage of this dramatic
effect and promoted the development of aviation from the industry to the airfields.
Ultimately the impulse given to the construction of airliners allowed the
improvement of bombers for Hitler’s plans to conquer Europe.92

The Air Ministry was created in the same year of the National-Socialist victory in
order to cement Hitler’s ideal. Herman Goering was appointed Air Minister. In 1934
the new imposing headquarters of the Air Ministry was built in Berlin’s
governmental quarter, Berlin-Mitte, designed by Ernst Sagebiel (1892-1970).
Sagebiel had worked in Erich Mendelsohn’s atelier until the latter fled to England in
1933. He then joined the Air Ministry and after the success of the governmental site
he was commissioned to design the new Berlin state airport in Tempelhof.93

The new airport was designed to host thirty times the traffic volume existing in
1936, and was expected to remain in service until the year 2000. All the activities
related to the airport were accommodated in one single structure: main passenger
hall including companies’ desks, boarding gates and arrivals track with custom
controls, baggage management in the ground floor, and restaurant in an open
terrace over the main hall. Numerous boarding gates were distributed along the
canopy facing the airfield. This enormous structure was an arc 1200 metres long,
reproducing the plan of the old airport. The furthest parts of this gigantic structure
were used as hangar and workshops. Large office spaces surrounded the entrance
from the land side. A rectangular courtyard forming the public entrance was
prolonged in a monumental plaza towards the north, which was never completed.
This plaza was included in the east-west secondary axis linked with the main north-
south axis planned by Albert Speer for the transformation of Berlin into Germania,
the capital of the Greater Reich (see ill. 7.1). The airport would play an important
part in the new shape of the city.94

In 1937 the structure of the new building was completed, as well as the external
finishes. However, the outbreak of war in 1939 interrupted the works. Some office
spaces were suitable for use, and the main departure hall was nearly completed.
However the rest of the passenger and airplane facilities were not finished. The old

90
Tempelhof airfield was the scene for Hitler’s speech on the 1st May 1933 in front of one million people.
Speer had organized a stage setting in tune with the importance of the event. Hitler’s speeches praised
the role of the working class in the new Germany, and promised major improvements for them and their
families. The following morning, various union offices were attacked and head activists taken to a
concentration camp beside the airport. Pascoe, D. Op. Cit. p175.

91
A good example of Hitler’s propaganda using the image of aviation is Leni Riefenstahl’s documentary
film Triumph of the Will (1934). The film shows subjective images of clouds and towns as seen from the
inside of a plane. The trip overlooking medieval German towns mixes up the ideas of modernity and
nationalistic tradition fostered by Fascism. Immediately after we see Hitler stepping onto an airfield
greeted by crowds, as a machine-age god arrived from heaven. Fascism was not alone to use aviation to
enhance political image: in 1932 Franklin Delano Roosevelt waited for the results of the Democratic
Convention, held in Chicago, in his mansion in Albany. When the favourable results were revealed,
Roosevelt flew all the way through to Chicago to accept the nomination in person. It was a major press
event, as well as the whole campaign had been. It was all very modern, and marked the beginning of a
new kind of political event: the airport campaign. See Gordon, A. Op. cit. p90.

92
This plans included the secret training of military pilots. See Schmidt, P. in Bowdler, R. Op. Cit. p138.

93
Dolf-Bonekämper, G. in Bowdler, R. Op. Cit. p52
94
Dolf-Bonekämper, G. in Bowdler, R. Op. Cit. p53.
For images of the urban design plan see Dittrich, Elke, Der Flughafen Tempelhof in Entwurfszeichnungen
und Modellen 1935-1944, Lukas Verlag, Berlin 2008

19
Passenger Terminal: The invention of a building type EDoc

building continued working as the main passenger terminal until 1945 when the
Allies took the control of western Berlin.95 In 1948 three concrete runways were
built by the Americans, in whose jurisdiction the airport fell after the division of
city. It was the time of the Berlin Airlift: from June 1948 to May 1949 Tempelhof
was the only access to the city, for people and goods, becoming a kind of icon of
the resistance of free Germany.96

The airport displays very different faces towards both the land and in the air sides.
The central situation of the airport in Berlin allows a prospect of the airport terminal
as a piece of urban architecture, very different from the great majority of airports
all over the world (see ill. 7.5 and 7.6.). This character is not only a consequence of
its location, but also of the choices made in its design. The land side is extended in
office blocks towards the city, in order to join the monumental urban axis planned
by Speer. The stone cladding and the rows of windows are organized on a human
scale, although they are imposing. The enormous size of the land façade is
attenuated by the turrets enclosing the accesses to the roofs of the piers. Through
them 65,000 spectators were to reach the viewing platforms on the roof top.97 The
impressive structure was planned to dialogue with the future buildings around the
circular plaza which never were built.

The land side of the complex (it is difficult to call it simply “building”) stands in
perfect balance with the airside devices, the piers and apron, extending its wings
1,200 metres along the curved airfield border. The airside looks completely
different when seen from the airfield. The boarding area and the integrated hangars
are covered by a metallic canopy with a cantilever spanning more than 39 meters.
The solid steel beams are welded together using techniques quite novel in Germany
at that time.98 The surfaces are smooth, free of rivets so common for such metallic
structures.

In 1951 the airport was opened again for commercial flights. The main departure
hall was refurbished and put again into use again in 1962. Even after the end of the
Soviet blockade, Tempelhof still represented a gateway towards the free world,
avoiding the problematic land routes in and out of West Berlin. Tempelhof
continued operations until the new Berlin Airport, Tegel, opened in 1975. From
then, Tempelhof was used only for special occasions during the last years of the
two Germanys. After the fall of Berlin Wall in 1989 the airport reopened for small
and medium haul flights until the definitive closure in October 2008.99 Tempelhof
was once well known for its convenient situation close to the core of Berlin, a
circumstance that ultimately forced its closure: noise, pollution, and a constrained
airfield limited the number and type of flights allowed to operate, making it

95
When the Soviet troops first explored the building they found seven levels of catacombs beneath it.
There they discovered, among other secrets, an aircraft factory. Dietmar and Ingmar Arnold, Dunke
Welten: Bunker Tunnel und Gewölve unter Berlin. Berlin 1997. Cited in Pascoe, D. Op. Cit. p161.

96
Between June 1948 and May 1949 the Soviet Union blocked the Western Allies' railway and road
access to the sectors of Berlin under Allied control. By cutting supplies of food and fuel, Soviets sought
to control the entire city, and ultimately the nation. The British, French and American air forces
organised the Berlin Airlift, bringing goods and fuel to the population of West Berlin. Over 200,000 flights
brought 13,000 tons of daily necessities in one year. The blockade was finally lifted in May 1949 and
resulted in the creation of two separate German states and the division of Berlin. Cook, C. and
Stevenson, J. Op. Cit.

97
Dolf-Bonekämper, G. in Bowdler, R. Op. Cit. p54.

98
Dolf-Bonekämper, G. in Bowdler, R. Op. Cit. p58.

99
For more details on final Tempelhof closure see Cleveland-Peck, Patricia, ‘Berlin Airlift Remembered’,
in History Today, 1/10/2008, vol. 58, iss. 10, p 3-4.

20
Passenger Terminal: The invention of a building type EDoc

economically unsustainable. A chapter of the city history was closed with it, and an
uncertain future appears over Berlin’s cityscape.100

7. Analysis
The four terminals described are individual design proposals for a single type of
building. They illustrate the problems and solutions that, in the main, were common
for 1930s airport terminals. Architects were for the first time addressing the
contemporary demands of air traffic, passenger comfort and technological
development. Different environmental conditions and scale considerations allowed
for diverse solutions.

The historical and political circumstances

As noted by John Zukowsky in his book Building for Air Travel, the social
significance of the airport has changed since the mid 1920s. The airport has served
as an outpost of civic and national pride, a mechanised processor101 of mass transit,
a catalyst to urban and suburban growth, and an example of free-market enterprise
trying to define itself beyond its functional purpose.102 When commercial air
services gained importance in the 1930s airports started to be considered as
significant pieces of infrastructure. The construction of new facilities or the
improvement of the existing became as important as the founding of national
airlines. Thus local and national authorities were actively involved in the investment
and promotion of new airports, encouraged by the boards of air companies.103

The clearest example of the influence of social and political circumstances is Berlin’s
airport. The ambition of Germany’s National Socialist Party was patent in
Tempelhof’s plan. Its development was directly linked with a grater project that
would shape the city of Berlin and ultimately all the German nation. Despite the
megalomaniac ambitions of the Nazis, the situation of the building inside the urban
fabric was the distinguishing feature of Tempelhof, setting it apart from most
airports, contemporary or future. The Government’s ideal of permanence and
triumph over all the surrounding nations was implicit in the size of the new building.
It was the actual projection of German air power, either for peace or war purposes.
The huge space provided for spectators, including the organized access ways to the
roof that resembled a stadium, reflected the Fascist predilection for crowds
gathered around the symbols of national pride. However Tempelhof would never

100
At the same time this essay is being produced, an important international competition is being held to
submit ideas about the refurbishment and recovery of Tempelhof airport and airfield. Soon after the
summer 2010 the future of the whole complex will be revealed.
101
The term “processor” applied to passenger terminals is relatively new, and responds to a more
functional approach to airport design developed since the 1960s. The “processing” of passengers
includes the check-in, the security and passport controls, the baggage management and the customs.
Through it, passengers are allowed to get to the piers (on the air or “clean” side of the terminal) to
board the planes, or to the arrivals hall (on the land side, together with the departures hall) to leave the
airport. See Schönwetter, Christian, Airport Design, Daab, Köln- London, 2005, and International Air
Transport Association, Handbook for Airport Development Reference Manual, IATA, Zurich, 3rd ed. 2000.

102
Zukowsky, J. Op. Cit. p16.

103
Not all airports in Europe developed from public initiatives. For example Gatwick Airport was firstly
promoted by developer Morris Jackaman, and finished in 1936. Jackaman took full advantage of the
train link with London while the main airport, Croydon, being closer to the city, was poorly connected
with it. See Gordon, A. Op. Cit. p82.

21
Passenger Terminal: The invention of a building type EDoc

prove its suitability for the Nazi purposes due to the delay on its completion.
Instead, when it played an important role within Berlin after the war was over, the
enclosing shape of the building and the wideness of the airfield reinforced the idea
of freedom and protection. Tempelhof did become a symbol for Berlin’s population,
although never with the implications that were initially planned.

Ireland was a young republic, which was eager to take her place among western
nations. She first showed this ambition with the shamrock-shaped pavilion at the
1939 New York fair.104 At the same time, the possibility of becoming a mayor hub
for transatlantic flights and the desire to catch up neighbouring countries in the
conquest of the air inspired the construction of a brand new airfield and a huge
terminal with all the ingredients of modernity. It is not clear how much young
Fitzgerald was really involved in the design of the terminal building, and how the
conservative government was won over to his Modernist proposals. Nevertheless,
despite the hidden existence of the airport until after the end of World War II, both
the general public and its political patrons adopted the building as a symbol of
national progress. Finally, the airport played the part for which it was designed.

The new airport in Spain’s capital was more a success for its architect, and for the
spread of modern architecture in Spain, than for the history of airport design.
Madrid Airport was initially promoted by local authorities but the competition and
expectations around its construction generated great interest in the whole
architectural community. Architects and engineers looked optimistically to the
future in difficult political times. However, a short term view of the real possibilities
of aviation led to a modest building, although in a rational Modernist style very
much in tune with the times. The target audience of its architect, the air traffic
authorities and the small elite enjoying flights, understood the success of his
project. From one side he was chosen to design other airport terminals and public
buildings even in changing political circumstances. On the other, the upper urban
class identified with Gutierrez Soto’s approach to modernity commissioning him to
produce many other good pieces of modern architecture, especially in Madrid.

Le Bourget did not bring many innovations, but the size and shape of the building
satisfied the requirements of its patrons, even when they seemed contradictory:
while a stunning new building fit in with the ethos of the Exhibition to be held in
Paris, some of the old pavilions remained. This decision compromised the general
plan of the airport and thus the success of the new building. Still, the size and scale
of the first airport of France was imposing enough to fulfil the expectations of its
patrons, and it continued as a popular icon linked to remarkable episodes of French
aviation history.

Functional requirements

Functionality and clarity should be the essential characteristics of modern airport

terminals. This was in sum the only recommendation for airport terminal design
published in the catalogue of the RIBA in 1937.105 However, functional
requirements in the 1930s were far from the rigorous demands of contemporary
airports. Before terrorist attacks threatened air travel in the 1960s, passenger
terminals were open spaces where passengers and visitors could mix nearly until to
the moment of boarding. Once strict limits were established between those who

104
The Irish pavilion in the New York world fair was designed by Architect Michael Scott. It was the first
time that Ireland was present as an independent country at a world exhibition. See Larmour, Paul,
Architecture and the Free State, Gandon Editions, Dublin 2009.

105
Scholberg, P. Op. Cit. p60.

22
Passenger Terminal: The invention of a building type EDoc

were flying and those who were not, terminals were dramatically divided into “land”
and “air” sides. The airside tends to elongate in order to deliver the numerous
passengers boarding the planes, while the land side deepens allowing longer
queues for check-in and security controls. This dichotomy is visible in the shape of
modern airports, such as new Dublin Terminal 2. In contrast, the old Dublin
building from 1940 still shows a compact form. Paris and Madrid were also compact
buildings, but Tempelhof, again, proved to be a visionary project. It had different
levels for different uses, as the first terminal built in 1929 had done before, but
with increasing complexity (see ill.7.2.). In Sagebiel’s project passengers were
efficiently delivered to and from the airplanes, which waited protected by the wide
canopy. Security and comfort accompanied the operations (see ill. 7.4.). In Dublin
and Paris, the connection between planes and terminal was not even considered,
and all the movements in the apron were made without fixed weather protection or
pathways. Madrid established a discrete relationship with the apron, displaying a
covered corridor to shelter the passengers during a small part of their way to the
aeroplanes. The scale of the building and the volume of operations initially expected
did not demand a more lavish provision. Still, it was an innovative device that
would be developed in further airports.106

The connection with land transportation started to be relevant in this second

generation of airports. Roads and cars often did not allow for fast communications
with the city centres. Consequently, train connections were suggested as critical in
airport planning:

“The possibility of arranging rail access should be carefully studied. This

is more important as the recent history of internal air services has
shown that overland air journeys of about 100 miles and under are
slower than the corresponding rail journey. It appears therefore that the
area which an all-weather commercial aerodrome can serve may be
greater than has commonly been supposed.”107

Tempelhof had its own suburban station which connected with Berlin’s city
centre.108 The other three examples were only connected by roads. However, in the
case of Ireland, the advantages of quick air connections to outside the island
largely justified the use of aeroplanes. Beside this, none of the buildings anticipated
the need to segregate arrivals and departures in the land façade, as traffic at the
entrance of the terminal was not expected to be especially intense. One single
entrance, albeit wide, allowed people in either direction to connect with the means
of travel to their final destination.

Lucidity and transparency

Once concrete or metal frame structures allowed the free organization of the
exterior envelope of buildings, transparency, and the massive use of glass, became
a distinctive feature of modern architecture. Utopian architects like Bruno Taut first

106
This device is similar to the boarding corridor displayed for transatlantic ships in port terminals, such
as the Gare da Rocha in Lisbon. In airports, as similar device, in a much bigger scale, was used in 1939
for LaGuardia airport, New York. Called “the Skywalk”, it allowed loading twenty four airplanes at the
same time. It can be considered the precedent of modern boarding piers. See Gordon, A. Op. Cit.
pp114-115.

107
Lieut.-Colonel Sir Francis Shelmerdine, Director-General of British Civil Aviation, in Scholberg, P. Op.
Cit. p9.

108
Dolff-Bonekämper, G, in Bowdler, R. Op. Cit, p51.

23
Passenger Terminal: The invention of a building type EDoc

envisioned a world of “crystal architecture”.109 Light entering buildings through wide

glazed surfaces was synonymous with evolution, science and positivist thinking.
Some years later this vague expression found a new meaning in the paradigms of
20th century architecture: the skyscraper and the airport. As explained before,
visibility in airports was an important mean of conversion for potential passengers.
An observer wrote “Nothing could impart greater confidence than for a person to
see airplanes arriving and departing frequently without confusion or accident”.110
This sense of transparency and lucidity in fact involves a feeling of security much
needed when approaching a departing plane. Today, airport designers struggle to
ensure the inclusion of natural light in the lower levels of contemporary airports,
while dealing with the environmental problems of sun-exposed all-glass façades.
Airports in the 1930s were not so demanding, as most of the time the depth of the
buildings allowed an amount of natural light even in the lowest floors. Still, the
activities related with public views of the airfield, such as restaurants or lounges,
usually occurred on the upper levels, while the transit of passengers took place at
the apron height. Big glass screens were incorporated to allow passengers and
visitors to view the airfield activity. Open terraces were common, although modern
security measures banned them decades ago. All the four airports described met
the requirement for open terraces in a similar way, despite differences of scale that
put Madrid and Berlin at opposite extremes. However, Berlin’s airport displayed a
particular version of the “spectacle of flying”. Tempelhof’s big window at the end of
the departures hall faced air side, but allowed only the view of flying planes, like in
a huge cinema screen (see ill7.7.). The possibly less uplifting view of land
operations such as loading, refuelling or passenger boarding remained hidden, only
unveiled for those really involved in flying.

Style

From the beginning of the 20th century, the theories of Modernist architecture and
city planning spread all over Europe up to the Second World War. Architecture was
seen as a critical practice: aesthetic ideas emerged from critics of contemporary
society. Social and aesthetic changes were inextricably linked.111 Technological
progress was identified with a rupture from the past and the crisis of classical
grammar. It is not strange that airport designers were seduced by Modernism, and
that their projects reflected the changing times.

Madrid used an early version of modernism, softer and easier to understand both
for the competition jury and for potential future clients. Gutierrez Soto took full
advantage of the possibilities of concrete construction, using free pillars and
projecting slabs to create deep lines of shadow on the air façade. The concave
shape facing the apron reinforced the effects of light on the façade, creating
dynamic effects absent in many examples of rawer rationalism. The scale of the
building was that of domestic architecture. The double high entrance hall was the
only device permitted in a functionalist design to enhance the public spaces. All the
four architects involved in the airport’s design made use of this feature, although in
Madrid the result resembled the entrance of a big family house.

109
See Bruno Taut Glass Pavilion for the Werkbund exhibition in Cologne, Germany in 1914.Frampton, K.
and Futagawa, Y. Op. Cit. p188.

110
Hanks, Steadman S. International Airports, The Ronald Press Company, New York 1929, p141. Cited
in Gordon, A. Op. Cit. p85.

111
Campbell, H. in Becker, Annette, (ed.), 20th Century Architecture. Ireland, Prestel-Verlag, Munich
1997, pP86.

24
Passenger Terminal: The invention of a building type EDoc

Paris followed the aesthetics of naval design, deliberately to address a recognisable

canon. The scale of the terminal betrayed the rigid modulation and made it
repetitive, especially on the airside elevation where the successive set backs
diminished the importance of the building, despite its enormous length. The land
side was more consistent with the size of the terminal, although the modular design
was related more to the language of industrial architecture. The size of the interior
hall was on a par with the rest of the building and the spatial needs of the amount
of passengers expected.

Dublin Airport managed to become an icon of modernity after the war, but in the
moment of its completion Ireland was not prepared to understand Rationalism. The
principles of rational architecture might possibly have appealed to the conservative
government of Eamon de Valera112. The simplicity of Modern buildings attached to
the idea of designing for minimum standards embodied the official doctrine of a
modest and self dependent Ireland. The Modernist reaction to the materialistic
excess of the 19th century could be identified with the nation’s search of freedom113.
The other possibility for the Republic to build her self image was to look backwards
to past examples of art and architecture to find traditions where a new Irish culture
could anchor. In the end, the institutions in charge of developing the largest
buildings at the time (schools, hospitals and churches) showed a suspicion towards
Modernism. They preferred the revival of ancient styles rather than new ways of
expression. The result was that there were very few examples of avant-garde
architecture in Ireland at that time, apart from the houses of the architects
themselves or those of their close friends, with the rare exceptions of Dublin Airport
and the dismantled Irish Pavilion in New York for the 1939 World Fair114.
Eventually, Irish architecture did not achieve a national expression, either in
Modernism or in the recent past.115

The impressive and sober style of Tempelhof reflected directly the vocabulary of
Fascist’s aesthetics: a contradictory mixture of classicism and rationalism, always
on an imposing scale.116 The land façade was faced with stone. The rhythmical
composition of windows put the complex in a dialogue with the surrounding urban
landscape that would eventually be built. The imposing new avenues would explain
the grandeur of their nation to future generations. Above all, architecture was
another important mean of propaganda for Fascists regimes, and the opportunity of
Tempelhof was unique for this purposes. On the opposite side of the building things
went in a different way: the brutal view of the metal structure overlooking the
airside makes no concessions to aesthetics. It reminds passengers that they have
entered the aeroplane age.

112
Eamon de Valera (1882-1975) was Prime Minister of the Irish Free State (1932-48 and 1957-59) and
President of the Republic (1959-73). He founded the political party Fianna Fáil in 1926. See Brady,
Ciaran, The Encyclopaedia of Ireland, Oxford University Press, New York, 2000.
De Valera defended an independent, rural, catholic and self-sufficient Ireland, which eventually had ill
consequences in the country’s economy and social development. See Douglas, R. Op. Cit. p116-120.

113
Campbell, H, in Becker, A. Op. Cit. p86.
114
Michael Scott, the architect of the Irish Pavilion at the New York World Fair, noted that all buildings
would increasingly be seen from above as aeroplane travel became more common. Thus, he designed
his building to be appreciated also in plan, and therefore chose the shape of a shamrock, easily
recognizable from the air. See Walker, Dorothy, Michael Scott Architect, Gandon Editions, Kinsale 1995,
p96.

115
Walker, S. in Becker, A. Op. Cit. p26.
116
Speer referred to the Reich architecture in his memoirs. He defined “our imperial style” as a “stripped
classicism”, something that could express “German Strength and German greatness”. Speer, A. Into the
Third Reich, cited in Gordon, A. Op. Cit. p127.

25
Passenger Terminal: The invention of a building type EDoc

The choice of building materials was definitive for the final appearance of these
terminals. Some airport designers used brick for their façades, maybe for simplicity
of construction or maybe appealing to local tradition.117 However, concrete was
largely the favourite material for airports. Its plasticity allowed architects to create
dynamic forms in dramatic contrast with wide glass surfaces. Airport designers
were inspired by the Modernist architects, who often praised concrete as the
paradigm of modernity.118 Furthermore, the spans needed for airports were not as
big as train stations, or even hangars, where metal frame structures were widely
used. Concrete gave buildings a sense of heaviness and attachment to land which
had little connection with the lightness of airliners, and much to do with the needed
sense of security that reassured passengers before and after their flights.
Furthermore, concrete (or brick covered in plaster, giving similar results) was
frequently used in port terminals as well, and these were often a source of
inspiration for airport design as we noted for Dublin, Paris and Madrid. The soft
curved lines and the whiteness of the façades resembled the big transatlantic ships.
It was not until airports grew and became more functional places in the 1950s and
60s that metal structures were commonly used. Today we identify metal structures
with the wide architectural spaces we see in modern airports, and with the
technological appeal of airliners.

Exceptionally, Tempelhof’s architect was aware of to the two different sides that the
building would have, planning different finishes for them. Stone cladding in the land
side linked the airport to its urban context, and appealed to the classicism implicit
in Fascist aesthetics. The air side showed the taste for modernity and the
vocabulary of engineering, reflected in the big metal canopy and the sober façade
beneath it.119

Finally, the sense of strict functionality affected some airports’ degree of

ornamentation. Although these were indeed buildings crated for selected
customers, nothing justified an unnecessary luxury of ornament in façades. The
adoption of rationalism contributed to the rawness of some of them, most striking
in the largest buildings at Dublin and Le Bourget. Differently, Tempelhof had some
huge sculptures and symbols decorating the exterior which emphasised its political
character. These were removed once the airport fell into non-German hands.120

When we look at the internal decoration of passengers facilities we discover a

higher grade of refinement. We know about the interiors of our case study airports
from photographs, sometimes difficult to date, except for Tempelhof where the

117
Some airports built in brick: German Fuhlsbüttel near Hamburg built in 1928-29, or British Speke
near Liverpool, finished in 1938. See Bowdler, R. Op. Cit. pp62-89, and Voight in Zukowsky, J. Op. Cit.
p37

118
Concrete had been used from the beginning of the 20th century, but around 1917 accurate manuals
and regulation on reinforced concrete construction were published, allowing for architects, engineers and
contractors to include it in their projects. It is also important to note that concrete was much more safe
in conditions of fire than metal frame structures, which made concrete more popular. See Frampton,
Kenneth, Modern Architecture: a critical history, Thames and Hudson, London 1985, p 39.
Some of the first examples of the expressive use of concrete for Modernist expression very much in the
fashion of 1930s’ airport design are Tony Garnier’s sketches for his Citté Industrielle. See Frampton, K.
and Futagawa, Y. Op. Cit. p130. Le Corbusier developed both the possibilities of serial construction and
the casting of expressive forms using concrete. Frampton, K. Op. Cit. pp150-155.

119
One of the first images of exposed metal structures for airports is Yorke, Rosemberg and Mardall’s
Gatwick terminal in 1958. The new wing shows an updated version of functionalism, following the first
functional design of 1936. See Zukowsky, J. Op. Cit. pl 91-93, p 143.

120
Dolff-Bonekämper, G. in Bowdler, R. p58.

26
Passenger Terminal: The invention of a building type EDoc

original project did not reach such a degree of completion. Bars, restaurants and
lounges were more carefully decorated, drawing on Modern Movement vocabulary.
Aeroplane interiors were also subject to such considerations. It was again in the
1930s that architects and interior designers were involved for the first time in
airline corporate image.121

Obsolescence: the changing airport.

A recurrent problem in airport design from its very beginning has been
obsolescence. As pointed out by Reyner Banham in his influential article published
in 1962,122 it is inherent in the nature of airports, and maybe it is their greatest
virtue. It seems not possible to achieve the definitive design, the necessary final
extension, not even to fix the minimum programmatic standards. The need of being
in constant revision was foreseen by some of the first airport designers and
patrons, especially after 1930. As explained in the introductory section, this decade
would see the first improvised structures for civil passengers surpassed by the
evolution of commercial flights: aeroplanes became bigger, heavier and faster;
flights were more frequent and reached more distant destinations that necessitated
new controls. The number of passengers multiplied, as well as the number of
visitors, seduced by the glamour of modernity embodied by airports and airplanes.
Not only terminals but also hangars and airfields had to adapt to the demand for
bigger and better facilities.

The actors involved in airport planning reacted to these facts in two different ways.
Firstly, the fact that commercial aviation had become a growing business (even
when it was not economically successful) inspired airport patrons to create
structures capable of adapting to larger future demands. At the same time, they
worked to generate even more air traffic. Secondly, since the development of
aviation was linked with the ideal of progress, boasting new and modern airports
was not sufficient for modern nations. The airports also had to be big enough for
the expectations of the country itself.

The possibility of enlarging the runways, hangars or auxiliary structures was limited
by the amount of land available and the proximity of other buildings out of the
control of the airport. But the number of passengers processed could still grow as
far as the capacity of the airfield permitted. Designers of airport terminals
responded to anticipated demands by following different strategies: one would be
making the buildings easy to extend, understanding that the future of airports is
difficult to estimate, but always considering the opportunity for growth. The other
possibility was to make the buildings large enough for future expectations,
depending on the present investment funds available. Le Bourget was restrained by
time and existing conditions, and the architect chose to make a modular structure
which could be extended when needed. What is not so clear is if Labro planned how
a larger structure would adapt in terms of quality without betraying the original
scheme. From a functional point of view, more than one boarding gate would have
been desirable for simultaneous operations as expected in a bigger terminal, while
the main hall at the core of the building would have rendered out of scale in the
case of an enlargement. The speed and quality of passenger process would have
been affected: bigger buildings and services involve qualitative changes in
architectural approaches.

121
For a history of corporate design and aeroplane internal fitting see Zukowsky, J. Op. Cit. p16.

122
Banham, R. Op. Cit.

27
Passenger Terminal: The invention of a building type EDoc

Tempelhof and Dublin terminals chose the second option, with obvious differences
in their outlook on the future. Dublin allowed two simultaneous operations both in
arrivals and departures, or even more with minimal alterations of the original plan.
It also went through some extension on office space at the upper levels, following
the plans of the original project by Fitzgerald.123 Berlin was prepared for whatever
the future would bring, or at least that is what its planners thought. Multiple
accesses to the apron allowed the rise in the number of simultaneous operations.
The size of the main hall and the separation of flows on different levels later
permitted the processing of a huge number of passengers in the 1950s and 60s.
However, the new jets were too big to fit under the comfortable canopy designed
for 1940’s aeroplanes, and the practicality of Tempelhof’s piers ended. Finally,
Madrid-Barajas had little expectations about its future growth and its capacity to
attract more traffic. The small and compact building was not prepared for drastic
changes, and felt in disuse and abandonment until its demolition. This shows how
Barajas was designed looking towards the previous generation of airports rather
than considering future demands.

Present

The four airport terminals used as examples also illustrate well the different ways in
which this type of building developed in general after 1940. As explained before,
airports are in constant change and their definitive layout is nearly impossible to
fix. Airports are always threatened with modernisation. The first challenge that
1930s airports had to face was the arrival of a new war. Spain was the first of the
four countries to be involved in a conflict. However, Madrid’s terminal and airfield
did not suffer major damage. Instead, the existing facilities were little by little
improved during the 1940s, while the airport gained in importance and number of
flights. Ireland was not involved in the World War II, at least nominally. Although
the airfield was obstructed and flights were suspended for a short time, the
terminal did not suffer damage either, very differently from what was happening in
Le Bourget: that airport was repeatedly bombed by the Allies from 1941.124 A fast
reconstruction after the war restored the building to its original shape. Finally,
Tempelhof could only see its completion until after the war, and the original project
was adapted to the post-war air traffic needs.

These new demands were a consequence of the development of aviation itself,

again due to the impulses of the war. New materials and technology modernised
airport construction. New kinds of aircraft and international air routes reshaped the
world. Radar and other wartime achievements made commercial flying safer and
more efficient. The new conditions directly affected to airport terminals: paved
runways were standard by the end of the 1940s and the size of the planes and the
number of travellers could grow again. Passengers became the main target of
airport business, and visitors did not enjoy the same attention displayed before.
Commercial activity focused on travellers had to be integrated into the terminals.
Baggage management, ticketing and controls became more complex. In sum,
bigger and more efficient terminals were demanded, and not all the old ones were
designed to evolve.

The Barajas Terminal was destined to disappear, as its minimal scale could not cope
with the amount of activity that the economic boom of the 1960s would bring. In a
nation eager to catch up Europe after two decades of isolation there was no place

123
Some of the upper office spaces filled up open spaces left on purpose for further completion. See
Oran, H. Op. Cit. p70.

124
Inizan, C. in Bowdler, J. Op. Cit. p114

28
Passenger Terminal: The invention of a building type EDoc

for the remains of the defeated Republican past. Still, the choice of the site was
successful, and the airport could continue with its huge further development. The
other three terminals would go through some transformations, as far as they had
space available for successive renovations. However, when jet planes became the
norm in the 1960s, terminals were completely reshaped:125 The enormous amount
of passengers had to be delivered directly to the aeroplanes, without interfering
with the apron. Definitely, old airport terminals were obsolete. On the other hand,
airfields demanded more space and environmental conditions obliged the
separation of airports from growing cities. All together made the first facilities such
as Le Bourget and even Tempelhof lose more and more traffic, leading to their
closure. Fortunately, both airports’ legendary history reassured the preservation of
the old terminals, albeit with different uses. Finally, Dublin Airport’s first terminal
still stands in the centre of the busiest airport in Ireland, outside the public areas.
Successive enlargements, from the Lourdes Pavilion126 to the brand new Terminal 2
to be opened in 2010, did not transform it drastically. Still, its architectural
importance has not been sufficiently underlined, and it is not as renowned as the
last two examples mentioned.127

8. Conclusions
1930s airport terminals were pioneers in the invention of a new type of building
designed to address new functional demands. But they also had to provide the
architectural framework for a totally new experience: the drama of flying.128
Although it was still dangerous, the excitement and advantages of air
transportation gained little by little more enthusiasts. Flying became a common
procedure for some experienced travellers, who could appreciate a number of
things. Firstly, terminals tended all to work in the same way, which made
passengers feel safe even in foreign and distant countries. Secondly, airport
terminals were places to arrive to, or to departure from, but not at first places for
transit. Facilities for passengers were created to accommodate the public during
long delays, or to allow the non travellers to enjoy the spectacle of flying. Finally,
airport terminals enhanced the experience of flying, reassuring those involved in
the business and making it more attractive for unbelievers.

125
The old DC-3s flying in the 1930s could carry twenty-one passengers. The new Lockheed
Constellation, launched in 1939 for transatlantic flights, carried eighty. The Douglas DC-6, operating
since 1946, eighty six. The Boeing Stratocruisers (1947) could carry more than one hundred. When two
of these planes arrived at the same time, there was inevitable chaos in the ground. Gordon, A. Op. Cit.
p144.
But they were still small and slow planes: in the decade of the 60’s Jet planes (DC-8s, Boeing 707s,
Caravelles) could carry more than 200 passengers and cross the Atlantic in 7 hours. See Gordon, A. Op.
Cit. p174. Zukowsky, J. Op. Cit. and Leary, William M. From Airship to Airbus: the History of Civil and
Commercial Aviation, Washington and London, 1995.

126
From 1950 the traffic to Lourdes in South West France became steadily more concentrated. The so
called “Lourdes Pavilion” was a small temporary wood shed built in 1958. It was destined for pilgrims
and their assistants, and had special facilities to cope with the wheelchairs of many of the travellers. See
Oram, H. Op. Cit. p98 and photograph in p.118.

127
Dublin Airport is now celebrating its 60 anniversary with a small exhibition of historical photographs.
Hopefully it will make the building a little more popular.

128
Some authors have used this term when describing architecture in airport terminals. See Banham, R.
Op. Cit. See also Le Corbusier, Post Script to the 4th volume of his Complete Works, 1938-46: “travel is a
drama: plane is a flying boat, boat is a flying hotel”.

29
Passenger Terminal: The invention of a building type EDoc

The basic functions that the airport terminal should fulfil were pointed out years
later by Michael Browne in an article inspired by the functional theories of the
1960s: Control, linked with passengers’ flow; storage, either for people, baggage,
mail, load or merchandise; and shelter from weather conditions, noise and
pollution.129 But how was the setting for all these activities had to be created? That
is what the first terminal buildings had to unveil. Firstly, they had to be modern, an
explicit reflection of contemporary times, whatever modernity meant for the
airport’s patron or architect. They had to be full of light, the light of science and
positivist progress, inspired by Rationalism. They had to be functional; there was no
space for luxuries. The goal of aviation was its efficiency and speed, from the
departure terminal to the point of destination. Finally, they had to look to the
future, and foresee what would come in the following years, even in very fast
changing times. The ability to forecast future events was the measure of the
ambition of each airport’s patrons.

Things eventually changed much more than the first designers of airports could
imagine, even more than the first utopian architects’ visions predicted. Terminal
buildings had to be adapted to other demands, especially to their own economic
sustainment. New airports are now designed for the culture of the masses with the
attractions of commercial malls. They became places for transit, where all activities
take place in an ordered manner, preferably on different levels to avoid disruptions.
Their vast scale surpassed long ago the most optimistic expectations of early
planners. The airport terminals built before the World War II were designed for a
more sophisticated kind of public. The spaces created for air travellers were as
elegant as modern houses, and as welcoming as concert halls. Not having to deal
with crowds like train stations, they could afford the luxury of using smaller scales
and massive materials. Even when planned for a distant future, as Tempelhof
airport was, none of them was able to anticipate what the evolution of aviation
would bring. Any intention to do so looks naïve when seen from today. These
buildings were made for their time, and the best that could happen to them was
their preservation and historical record.

129
Browne, Michael. “Airport Passenger Buildings” in The Architectural Review, Nov 1962, p341-347.

30
 Passenger Terminal: The invention of a building type

Biliography

Books and publications by author

Abejón Adámez, Manuel

Los aeropuertos españoles: su historia: 1911-1996, AENA, 1996.

Banham, Reyner
“The obsolescent Airport”, The Architectural Review. Vol.132, nº 788, Oct. 1962, p.
250-253.

Becker, Annette (Ed.)

20th Century Architecture. Ireland, Prestel-Verlag, Munich 1997

Bowdler, Roger (et al.)

Berlin Tempelhof, Liverpool Speke, Paris Le Bourget: airport architecture of the
thirties, Paris: Éditions de Patrimoine, 2000.

Browne, Michael
“Airport passenger building” in Architectural Review, Nov. 1962, p. 341-347

Chueca Goitia, Fernando

Arquitectura de Madrid, siglo XX, Ed. Tanais, Madrid, 1999

Clancy, Brendan
Civil Aviation in Ireland, Engineering Ireland, Ronald Cox Ed. The Collins Press,
Cork 2006. 160-166

Cleveland-Peck, Patricia
‘Berlin Airlift Remembered’, in History Today, 1/10/2008, vol. 58, iss. 10, p 3-4.

Cook, Chris, and Stevenson, John,

Modern European History, Longman, Harlow, Essex, 1998 (3rd ed.)

Baldellou Santolaría, Miguel Ángel

Luis Gutiérrez Soto, Electa, Madrid 1997

De Miguel, Carlos
La obra de Luis Gutiérrez Soto, COAM, Madrid 1978

Desideri, Paolo.
Pier Luigi Nervi, Gustavo Gili, Barcelona 1982.

Dittrich, Elke
Der Flughafen Tempelhof in Entwurfszeichnungen und Modellen 1935-1944, Lukas
Verlag, Berlin 2008

Douglas, Roy,
Ireland since 1690, The Blackstaff Press, Belfast 1999, p116-120.

b2
 Passenger Terminal: The invention of a building type

Forsyth, Alastair
Buildings for the age: new buildings types 1900-1939, Royal commission on
Historical Monuments, London 1982.

Frampton, Kenneth and Futagawa, Yukio

Modern Architecture 1851-1945. A.D.A. Edita, Tokyo 1981

Frampton, Kenneth
Modern Architecture: a critical history, Thames and Hudson, London 1985

Giedion, Sigfried
“La arquitectura contemporánea en España” in Cahiers d’Art, no. 3, 1931, pp.157-
164

Glidden, Horace. Law, Hervey. Cowles, John

Airports: design, construction and management, McGraw-Hill, New York / London
1946

Gordon, Alastair
Naked airport, a Cultural History of the World’s most Revolutionary Structure,
University of Chicago Press, Chicago, Ill. 2008

Hanks, Steadman S.
International Airports, The Ronald Press Company, New York 1929, p141.

Hecker, Manfred.
“Heimatkunde: Flughafen Tempelhof, Berlin, Platz der Luftbrücke/Tempelhofer
Damn/Columbiadamm”, Bauwelt, 1994 Dec.2, v.85, n.46, p.2543-2544

International Air Transport Association,

Handbook for Airport Development Reference Manual, IATA, 3rd ed. Zurich 2000.

Larmour, Paul.
Architecture and the Free State, Gandon Editions, Dublin 2009

Le Corbusier
The Radiant City: Elements of a Doctrine of Urbanism to be used as the Bases of
our Machine-Age Civilization. London, 1935

Le Corbusier
“Urbanisme et aéronautique”, Techniques et Architecture, Aéronautique nº 9-12,
1947, p. 463-467.

Le Corbusier,
Aircraft, Trefoil Publications, London 1935.

Le Corbusier
The City of Tomorrow and its planning. The Architectural Press, London 1929

Leary, William M
From Airship to Airbus: the History of Civil and Commercial Aviation, Vol1,
Infrastructure and Environment. Washington and London, 1995

López-Pedraza Munera, Francisco

Aeropuertos, INTA, 1947

b3
 Passenger Terminal: The invention of a building type

McDonald, Frank
The Destruction of Dublin, Gill and Macmillan, Dublin 1985

Myerscough, John
“Airport provision in the Inter-War years”, Journal of Contemporary History, vol. 20,
nº 1, Jan. 1985, p. 41-70.

Oram, Hugh
Dublin Airport, the history. Aer Rianta, Dublin 1990

Pascoe, David
Airspaces, Reaktion Books, London 2001

Pearman, Hugh
Airports: a century of architecture, London, Laurence King Publishing, 2004.

Rothery, Sean
Ireland and the new architecture. 1900-1940, The Lilliput Press 1991

Scholberg, Philip (ed.), Royal Institute of British Architects

Airports and Airways 1937, Catalogue to the exhibition arranged by the RIBA,
London, RIBA, 1937.

Schönwetter, Christian (ed.)

Airport Design, Daab, Köln / London 2005.

Skinner, Liam and Cranitch, Tom (ed.)

Ireland and World Aviation. The Complete Story. Director Publications, Dublin

Schmidt, Peter
A Nation of Flyers: German Aviation and the Popular Imagination. Harvard
University Press, Cambridge, Mass, 1992

Thomas, Lowel,
European Skyways: the story of a tour of Europe by airplane, Houghton Mifflin
Company, Boston, 1927.

Utrilla, Luis and García Cruzado, Marcos

Historia de los aeropuertos de Madrid, AENA, Madrid 2005.

U. S. Department of State,
The Paris Peace Conference, 1919, U.S. Govt. Print. Off, Washington 1942-47.

Vilar, Pierre
Historia de España, Serie General, Temas Hispánicos nº25, Ed. Crítica, Barcelona,
1989, 27th ed.

Walker, Dorothy
Michael Scott Architect, Gandon Editions, Kinsale 1995.

Warner, Edward P.
“International Air Transport” in Foreign Affairs, Vol. 4, No. 2 (Jan., 1926), pp. 278-
293

Wood, John Walter

Airports: Some Elements of Design and Future Development, New York, Coward-
McCann Inc., 1940.

b4
 Passenger Terminal: The invention of a building type

Zukowsky, John, ed.

Building for Air Travel, Architecture and Design for Commercial Aviation, Munich
and New York, Prestel, 1966.

Articles in magazines

“A Terminal building, Le Bourget Airport: architect Georges Labro”. Architect and

building news, 1937 Nov. 26, v. 152, p. 252-255

“RIBA Aerodrome Competition”, The architect’s Journal, nº69, 30 January 1929,

p208-11

Arquitectura, nº129, 1930, pp 13-28.

“The new airport at Le Bourget, Paris; Architect: G. Labro”, Architectural Review

Feb. 1939, p. 9-92

“RIBA Competition for a Design of an Aerodrome”, Journal of the Royal Institute of

British Architects nº36, 23 February 1929, p325-26.

L’Architecture d’Ajourd’Hui nº 3, 1936, nº8, nº9, 1937

b5
 Passenger Terminal: The invention of a building type

Illustrations

b6