I dont disagree, the lack of non-lift access to the air-rail link feels like an oversight and complicates things. But it looked to me like the area where the temporary steps were is currently a building site, so not sure what options there were to retain something. I'd like to think there will be something in the end. Though remember that the air-rail link moves in the not too distant future, so thats one problem gone...
I don't really see the removal of the air-rail link as a good thing, it seems like more messing with stuff that has worked fine for a long time. I really hope this isn't something that they are putting forward as a serious solution to the problem inside the airport's 4 walls.
Honestly though I don't see how the lifts make the queue longer as if the security hall was big enough everyone would be able to swipe their boarding pass and enter the security hall without staff having to limit access.
The fact that the queue goes further than the lift, or indeed, outside of the security hall, says more about the length of the queue rather than anything else.
If the security hall is big enough, why can't they fit all the passengers in there?
The main bit of my answer, that note you haven't tackled is above.
I've read Nick Barton's comments on liquids and it seems to me that the press, in their lack of in depth knowledge, have failed to challenge him on something basic here.
For 20 years I've had to pack my liquids in a clear plastic bag, bringing items of less than 100ml only. I have had to remove this, along with my laptop for inspection. I've got quite good at this such than I am already good to go or nearly there when I arrive at the touchdown area.
I can see not everyone does this and, let's put it this way, as a man, often travelling alone, I find myself needing less in the way of liquids to pass security.
I've never specifially felt I needed to take a 2 litre bottle of liquid through security. However I can see I might if I were buying duty free etc on the
inbound leg.
As I see it the new machines and systems now allow for at least what I was removing before to stay in the bag, as such passengers who aren't bringing big bottles of liquids should actually be able to pass through quicker. This must surely be a net improvement on the old machines.
NB now seems to be saying everything would be hunky dory if people could take 2 litres of liquid through, I don't see how that is going to improve passenger times.
Passengers on the whole appear to be following instructions to arrive early and adapting their behaviours, such as ditching checked bags so they can get in the queue as early as possible. If the issue was just about taking 2 litres of liquid surely the whole issue could be eradicated by going back to the old 100ml rule, once people see that is the problem.
Also if you are standing in a queue for 3 hours maybe you are going to want to take some refreshment with you at least until you can get airside. I don't really see how there should be any issue with airport announcements, staff giving directions etc whereby people would arrive at he scanning area with 2 litre bottles of liquids, not knowing they can't take them through.
In the attached article to he also makes reference to the machines running "very slowly" due to a software upgrade. I'd like to see this to understand what he means, is the belt running slowly or what? Does the screen show something that went though 20 minutes ago. Sounds like complete BS to me.