Leelaw From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 4, posted (9 years 1 week 4 days ago) and read 2105 times:
Great news, although the Midway website hasn't been updated to show that the remainder of the Concourse A gates have been opened. I'm a Chicagoan and love this new facility. I'm a frequent flyer and use Midway as much as possible. Most people don't realize that 18million+ passengers are now being processed.
Leelaw From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 6, posted (9 years 1 week 4 days ago) and read 2088 times:
The flow through the security checkpoint is much better since they removed a section of moving sidewalk on the "Bridge" over Cicero Ave late last year that was causing a bottleneck.
Jsnww81 From United States of America, joined Jan 2002, 1867 posts, RR: 16 Reply 8, posted (9 years 1 week 3 days 23 hours ago) and read 2031 times:
The new Midway is great - but it's also a victim of its own success. It had the misfortune of being designed and constructed largely before the 9/11 attacks. The architects made a huge mistake in siting the security checkpoint on the Cicero Avenue bridge, IMHO (although they had no way of knowing what was about to happen).
The Chicago DOA has done its best to expand the checkpoint, and now it fans out into the middle of what was supposed to be a vast, open airside lobby. Arriving passengers going to baggage claim get funneled through a narrow passage into the landside terminal. There's been talk of building a second security bridge, or widening the existing one, but both prospects are very expensive and not likely to happen in the next few years.
To me the new MDW is too claustrophobic. The gate areas are wonderful and HUGE improvement over the old concourses, but the landside terminal, baggage claim and security checkpoint are just as much of a pain as they were in the 1947 terminal.
Leelaw From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 10, posted (9 years 1 week 3 days 23 hours ago) and read 1996 times:
The major design flaw with the MDW Terminal is that all arriving and departing passengers must simultaneously pass through the very small mezzanine level before they can get where they need to go. Even before 911 this design was nonsensical, as though the designers were trying to create a bottleneck. As a frequent user who otherwise loves the new MDW facility I'm not sure this fundamental design flaw can be overcome?
7E72004 From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 3586 posts, RR: 1 Reply 11, posted (9 years 1 week 3 days 21 hours ago) and read 1937 times:
MDW cannot be expanded anymore....ORD is too crowded...so the question is what are they going to do??? There is Gary or build a third airport....in Peotone.
The next generation of aircraft is just around the corner!
Cubsrule From United States of America, joined May 2004, 21293 posts, RR: 19 Reply 15, posted (9 years 1 week 3 days 16 hours ago) and read 1797 times:
I don't care about ORD building more gates, but it would be really nice for the runway reconfiguration to get underway. I'm sick of the shortsighted whining of many of those who live around the airport who fail to realize the problems with the current configuration. Hopefully, the city will get approval for the project in 2005 and will start building the north runway (eventually new 9R-27L). They've acquired much of the land for it and the opposition is less vocal there.
I can't decide whether I miss the tulip or the bowling shoe more
Airportplan From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 469 posts, RR: 3 Reply 18, posted (9 years 1 week 3 days 11 hours ago) and read 1699 times:
"how many planes can land simultaneously right now at ORD?"
3-VFR
2-IFR This is when ORD delays come into full effect. The new North 9-27 should help to reduce a great deal of this IFR delay. If the FAA stays on track, construction should begin on this runway next fall.
Sponsor Message: 
From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 3586 posts, 
Printer friendly format 
