[smArTaLlone]

Originally Posted by kingchef

certainly, it is exciting and impressive to see and experience, even though i rarely terminate in atlanta. i would not want to have to regularly experience the expanse of the place. my question, however, w/ the money involved, would it have been a better idea to build a second airport on the opposite side of the metro? i think most corporate ideas, businesses, etc., take the position that a particular "thing" maxes out its ideal production, service, etc., somewhat akin to the peter principle. in short, a decent argument for loss of service vs. increased better service, strengthened infrastructure for metro vs. inherent flaws due to size, location, etc. would this last addition/renovation been the right time to plant and grow another great and serviceable airport?

A new airport would have taken much longer and cost much more than building a new terminal not to mention the difficulty in finding an acceptable location for an airport. A second airport has been considered occasionally for several decades but no suitable location has been identified.