British airports I have been to this year and had no bother with - Inverness and Luton.

British airports I have been to this year and thought: "Keep your head down, stay calm and you can get through this" - Stansted, Gatwick and Heathrow.

I don't enjoy airports any more. That is, enjoy as in being part of the whole travel thing, the celebratory drink in the bar before boarding and expectation of a good film and dinner.

Now I dread the visit, like the dentist. There is every chance of long shuffling queues at check-in, passport control and immigration.

You can guarantee a series of pompous officials imbued with self-importance and the moral authority to order you to half-strip, take that drink out, check that bag in and wipe that smile off.

There will be a sign pointing out the 20 minute walk to the gate, and a warning to be at the gate 30 minutes before departure - and remember, if anything goes wrong, it will be ALL YOUR FAULT.

It leaves a sour taste at a time when it should be fun. So thank you Luton and Inverness for keeping it sweet and employing staff who are helpful and smile (apart from the jobsworth left luggage bloke at Luton).

Which is why I think it an excellent plan if Stansted and Gatwick are sold by BAA to new owners, who could not possibly make worse the sheer misery that currently pervades these airports.

BAA is not wholly to blame - it still largely makes money out of planes taking off and landing. But it doesn't set aviation policy - that would be the government, which has spectacularly failed to bite the bullet on runway expansion in the south-east for 20 years.

You can add any number of coffee bars and juice bars, but a lack of political will and a Nimby-ism attitude that opposes and suffocates any airport expansion plan has made it impossible for BAA to keep up to speed.

Since 2001, more stringent security and self-important staff have become fixtures: construction works and baggage delays the norm. But it's not true of all airports.

Independently owned airports like Luton or London City thrive because they can plan more efficiently. They can't build runways willy-nilly, but they can improve infrastructure, road and rail links.

They can also react more quickly to events, such as the liquid ban introduced last year which caused absolute chaos at BAA airports when the operator failed to recruit and train more staff quickly.

Which is one reason why British Airways is ramping up its presence at London City airport, adding Dublin and a New York business-only service. Conversely, the airport this summer invested in departure lounge extensions and new aircraft parking stands. Build, and they will come.

It will be very interesting to see who buys the airports which will be offloaded by BAA. Manchester wants to puts its experience into practise at Gatwick, and Ryanair is eyeing up Stansted - both excellent ideas.

I'm particularly intrigued by the idea of Ryanair running an airport - it's an incredibly lean machine of an airline, and could put its hard-won knowledge of the competitive aviation world into practise admirably.

In its ideal world, Ryanair would have us checking in at home, dropping off any bags ourselves and using technology to pass through security.

We would then pay Ryanair for a sandwich, drink, the priviledge of sitting down and catching the shuttle to the gate - where we would dutifully gather, sober and with one small bag. And it would work.

But can it make Stansted enjoyable? Oh no, I think that era is long gone, but bearable will do.

Times recommends

• Oasis of the Seas: the Times review
• The 20 best new year party places to stay
• Green Spaces 2009: are you the winning writer?