Alphascan From United States of America, joined Nov 2003, 936 posts, RR: 14 Posted (8 years 9 months 1 week 3 days 8 hours ago) and read 3940 times:
The following press release from the Business Travel Coalition makes a good case for the FAA to back off and let the marketplace solve the ORD traffic problems caused essentially UA and AA and their switch to RJs. While operations are up, number of seats has declined.
PRESS RELEASE
DOT Solution For O'Hare Problem Sidesteps Root Cause
Competition threatened; let the marketplace solve the problem
RADNOR, PA., August 18, 2004--The Business Travel Coalition (BTC) today raised concerns over the U.S. DOT's proposed solution for congestion at O'Hare International Airport. The 6 month "voluntary" plan locks in the number of hourly arrivals at the airport at 88 for all airlines, a reduction of approximately 5%. Low fare airlines are capped at 8 arrivals each, per day. While there may be localized and system-wide benefits in terms of a reduction in the average number of minutes of delay, the proposal comes with serious risks to competition, and does not address the root cause of the problem.
The number of operations at O'Hare is up some 10% in May 2004 compared with May 2000, while the actual number of seats is down 5% over the same period. This situation is a direct result of an increase in the use of Regional Jets (RJs) that comprised 44% of all flights at O'Hare in May of 2004 compared with 15% in May 2000. American and United airlines have caused this crisis and should solve it themselves without burdening others with government intervention.
CONCERNS
The government's plan effectively caps the level of low fare new entry at O'Hare and represents a template for gaming the system and frustrating new entry at other airports such as Boston, Dallas or Atlanta. It is exceedingly unlikely that the proposal will remain just a 6 month temporary fix; the DOT today was effusive in its praise of the solution. The O'Hare arrivals cap does nothing to address the inefficient use of scare resources at the airport as evidenced by the dramatic increase in use of RJs; the root cause of the problem.
ALTERNATIVE DOT ACTION: DO NOTHING
BTC chairman Kevin Mitchell stated, "A better solution is to 'think inside the box' and allow the marketplace to solve this problem. Connecting passengers do have alternative hub airports to fly through. If the DOT wants to do something it could issue a Press Release alerting passengers that connecting through O'Hare could be an arduous, unpredictable and costly process. Then we would see a shift in passengers to other hub airports and an immediate and significant increase in self-discipline in the scheduling departments at American and United."
Peter Buchheit, Director of Travel and Meeting Services for the Black & Decker Corporation said, "As is often the case with government solutions, what at first appears to be an effective intervention can result in marketplace distortions that cancel out intended benefits. Moreover, the federal government in the early years of deregulation did not truly understand how major incumbent airlines used government slot controls at airports to block new entry. We could be heading down that same path once again at O'Hare and other major airports."
"To he who only has a hammer in his toolbelt, every problem looks like a nail."
UA777222 From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 3348 posts, RR: 13 Reply 1, posted (8 years 9 months 1 week 3 days 8 hours ago) and read 3887 times:
AA and UA were called on it and moved out. It's the other guys who are taking the places that UA and AA opened that were supposed to be free to allow for a little "elbow room".
Ssides From United States of America, joined Feb 2001, 4059 posts, RR: 23 Reply 2, posted (8 years 9 months 1 week 3 days 8 hours ago) and read 3871 times:
As a big AA fan, I don't normally agree with pro-UA people, but UA777222 is correct here. AA and UA are pretty much the only airlines who have reduced their flights at ORD. Most other airlines have increased their operations. Everyone should bear the brunt of these restrictions, not just AA and UA.
The best option, however, is for ORD to become slot-controlled like DCA or LGA. However, I doubt UA or AA will go for that.
StevenUhl777 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 3, posted (8 years 9 months 1 week 3 days 7 hours ago) and read 3850 times:
"It's a giant shit sandwich and we all have to take a bite"
Bonus points to the person who can name the movie..
It relates here...ORD is a screwed up place when it comes to congestion, but UA and AA have equally done their part (again, from a pro-UA guy) to solve the problem. But...what happened? All the tiny outfits made up the difference, so now UA and AA have to take an additional hit to revenue and cut back even further now.
Just like the Sarbanes-Oxley rules for financial reporting, anytime the goverment steps in to solve a problem, they use a sledgehammer to kill a fly. Dumb bastards.
JoFMO From Germany, joined Jul 2004, 2211 posts, RR: 0 Reply 4, posted (8 years 9 months 1 week 3 days 7 hours ago) and read 3850 times:
Sorry, but the last given recommendation to DO NOTHING is really bullsh!t !!
You cant give the responsibility to to reduce traffic in the hand of the market and therefore to the individual airlines. AA and UA are remembering what happended as they reduced their flights the last time. And I am sure that they are only willing to give up slots again, if thay can be sure that no one else can pick them up.
Not UA and AA are the bad guys, the airlines who catched up the free slots after UA and AA gave them up last spring to relax the situation in ORD are guilty for the situation we have now.
UA777222 From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 3348 posts, RR: 13 Reply 5, posted (8 years 9 months 1 week 3 days 7 hours ago) and read 3828 times:
Well AA has many hubs near by and UA has IAD so those two still make out. It's the other guys who will have to fight for their slots! "I want a clean and fair flight(ding ding ding)"
Pilotpip From United States of America, joined Sep 2003, 3084 posts, RR: 12 Reply 6, posted (8 years 9 months 1 week 3 days 7 hours ago) and read 3788 times:
From an outsider's view, it could be good to open up ORD to more competition. God forbid AA or UAL go out of business. Loosing a big chunk of that traffic would really hurt an airport, just look at STL. TWA basically sucked up slots and gates that they weren't using to squelch any competition. As a result, the market was saturated and when TWA fell, STL fell soon after.
Then again, I'd like to see AA utilize STL a little more. Adding a few flights to major destinations could give a passenger in the hub and spoke system we all love another option for connecting and would free up some congestion at ORD. But, this could apply to any of the new airlines there as well and if you do that to one, you should apply the rule to all in some way.
UALPHLCS From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 7, posted (8 years 9 months 1 week 3 days 7 hours ago) and read 3764 times:
Look you want competion in Chicago go to MDW and fly WN. That's competition.
ORD is a mess and it affects just about every airport in the country. There is onyl one way to fix it permenantly and that is to reconfigure the runways, that is a ten or twenty year project. in the meantime we still have the problem.
The FAA asked UA and AA to help fix it, which they did. But the other carriers rushed in a filled the void. So now we have to have all the airlines back off.
Of course if you enjoy flgith delays during the summer because of weather in ORD, go ahead, and say it shouldn't be fixed. I think you will be in the minority however.
SHUPirate1 From United States of America, joined Sep 2003, 3661 posts, RR: 18 Reply 8, posted (8 years 9 months 1 week 3 days 6 hours ago) and read 3742 times:
Here's what I ask...why doesn't AA reduce ORD to an O&D hub, and boost STL to where they are actually connecting passengers wholesale through there...not only is ORD highly delay-prone as it currently stands, but AA's ORD terminal is also awful for connections, and they don't have a ton of gates (what, three concourses?)...they might just be better off with STL moving to where ORD currently is, and ORD moving to the point where there are connecting fewer passengers, and having more O&D passengers, and connecting the European passengers through JFK (with the possibility of connecting passengers from LGA to JFK with a free bus potentially provided by AA, as they do offer LGA/JFK connections)
Burma's constitutional referendum options: A. Yes, B. Go to Insein Prison!
Ual777contrail From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 9, posted (8 years 9 months 1 week 3 days 6 hours ago) and read 3691 times:
For us CSRS's in the field, we WILL take a hit this summer and fall because of this nonsense in ORD. Delays are right around the corner, sad we cant say MESA has WX delays their sad planes are the problem
ORD needs relief, the airlines that picked up the open slots need to give it all back. But you would think that if ORD wasn't so hell bent at being the busiest airport in the country they wouldn't have let the others to fill the voids.
DAMN ATL, why cant ORD be the busiest, and then non of us suffer.
AirframeAS From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 14150 posts, RR: 26 Reply 10, posted (8 years 9 months 1 week 3 days 5 hours ago) and read 3633 times:
FAA To Penalize All For UA,AA ORD Actions
I dont see in the original post where it says that the F.A.A. will penalize anybody for anything.... The thread title doesnt make sense....
A Safe Flight Begins With Quality Maintenance On The Ground.
Alphascan From United States of America, joined Nov 2003, 936 posts, RR: 14 Reply 11, posted (8 years 9 months 1 week 2 days 21 hours ago) and read 3515 times:
Bonus points to the person who can name the movie.
Steven: Sounds like something "The Wolf" would say in "Pulp Fiction". He had a lot of great one-liners in his 10 minutes in that flick.
AA and UA were called on it and moved out. It's the other guys who are taking the places that UA and AA opened that were supposed to be free to allow for a little "elbow room".
777: If that is the case, I change my opinion on this. However, the release gives the impression that the "other guys" turn out to be UAX and Eagle. If that is the case, the government should stay out and let AA and UA solve their own problems.
"To he who only has a hammer in his toolbelt, every problem looks like a nail."
Jsnww81 From United States of America, joined Jan 2002, 1859 posts, RR: 17 Reply 12, posted (8 years 9 months 1 week 2 days 21 hours ago) and read 3490 times:
What bothers me is that nowhere in this agreement was a stipulation made that the O'Hare expansion will get underway. I would have expected United and American to demand that construction begin within a year, as a condition of their agreeing to this.
Mayor Daley made a lot of noise in the last few weeks about using the ORD expansion as a leveraging tool if slots are ever reintroduced. Personally, I'd be willing to deal with a five to ten years of slots and 'reduced competition' if it meant the runways would get reconfigured... and I'd venture that American and United would too.
Kl911 From Ireland, joined Jul 2003, 4977 posts, RR: 14 Reply 13, posted (8 years 9 months 1 week 2 days 20 hours ago) and read 3466 times:
'''Low fare airlines are capped at 8 arrivals each, per day. '''
How can that be fair? Just start using slot coordinators like we have in Europe, who will give everybody the same chance to get a slot. At the moment the ORD system only increases a monopoly for certain airlines.
KL911
" The European consumer would crawl naked over broken glass to get low fares." Michael O'Leary
JGPH1A From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 14, posted (8 years 9 months 1 week 2 days 20 hours ago) and read 3453 times:
Re: connecting the European passengers through JFK (with the possibility of connecting passengers from LGA to JFK with a free bus potentially provided by AA
That would go down like a lead balloon with pax ! Connecting to a domestic flight from an international flight at any US hub airport is penance enough, without having the additional joy of going outside to the kerb to catch a bus to your next departure airport. Connecting from the International Arrivals terminal at ORD to other domestic concourses on the little train isn't SO bad though, I'm sure given the choice I'd pick and ORD connection over a JFK/LGA one. Rather, United should ramp up international connecting services through IAD - that is a reasonably civilised airport, or it would be if they had enough FIS counters.
Drerx7 From United States of America, joined Jun 2000, 4906 posts, RR: 9 Reply 15, posted (8 years 9 months 1 week 2 days 20 hours ago) and read 3434 times:
The most logical setup that I can see is to reduce the amount of Regional Jet Flying into ORD--larger aircraft into ORD similar to a Narita, Heathrow, or CLK.
Mikey711MN From United States of America, joined Nov 2003, 1380 posts, RR: 8 Reply 16, posted (8 years 9 months 1 week 2 days 20 hours ago) and read 3411 times:
Moman From United States of America, joined Aug 2004, 1048 posts, RR: 4 Reply 17, posted (8 years 9 months 1 week 2 days 18 hours ago) and read 3343 times:
I'd love to see more AA flights through STL. AA used the line about having a "reliever hub in STL for ORD" as a reason they wanted TWA.
I think what SHUPirate1 said makes complete sense.
STL doesn't have to deal with the traffic, lake-effect weather, and other bottlenecks that ORD does.
Boeing757/767 From United States of America, joined Jun 1999, 2264 posts, RR: 2 Reply 18, posted (8 years 9 months 1 week 2 days 18 hours ago) and read 3314 times:
For those who advocate doing nothing and letting market forces take care of the problem, I generally agree -- but not in this case.
ORD is unique, and what happens there has wide-reaching effects. This agreement, even mandated by the government, should be applauded by the airlines because ultimately their customers will have a more pleasant traveling experience, and that helps to keep fannies in the seats.
767Lover From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 19, posted (8 years 9 months 1 week 2 days 18 hours ago) and read 3305 times:
Seeing as Chicago is such a big business center -- as well as a connection hub for international travel -- I'm surprised that so many airlines have effectively eliminated or reduced business class/first class seating to that market vis-a- vis the use of RJs.
Won't this end up biting them in the tail? I'm sure there are plenty of connecting pax who would elect to fly to Narita out of JFK or LAX so they can take a business class seat from their home market versus a RJ to ORD.
So market demand may indeed end up fixing the problem after all.
Airportplan From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 469 posts, RR: 3 Reply 20, posted (8 years 9 months 1 week 2 days 17 hours ago) and read 3233 times:
"Seeing as Chicago is such a big business center -- as well as a connection hub for international travel -- I'm surprised that so many airlines have effectively eliminated or reduced business class/first class seating to that market vis-a- vis the use of RJs.
Won't this end up biting them in the tail? I'm sure there are plenty of connecting pax who would elect to fly to Narita out of JFK or LAX so they can take a business class seat from their home market versus a RJ to ORD.
So market demand may indeed end up fixing the problem after all."
LAX and JFK serve only a fraction of the domestic cities that ORD serves. You can't fly non-stop to many small and midsize mid-continent markets from either of these airports. Many of the ORD RJ cities are so small that if you didn't use RJ (or props) they would have no service at all. Larger markets such as DTW. CLE, STL have RJ service during slower midday periods. Many, many surveys have shown that (baring delays) business travelers would rather get home 2, 3 or 4 hour sooner on an RJ rather than waiting around the airport for a flight on a larger jet.
Airfrnt From United States of America, joined Jul 2004, 2775 posts, RR: 43 Reply 21, posted (8 years 9 months 1 week 2 days 13 hours ago) and read 3120 times:
The FAA explicitly stated that the reason for the second rounds of cuts was that while UA and AA had vectored back there flights, it was immediately picked up by other flyers.
Unfortunately ORD has now replaced the old DEN as the bane of the United States airspace. Of the 10 or so flights I have taken recently no less the half of them were delayed at DEN or DFW because of planes getting delayed due to weather or congestion at ORD.
ORD apparently has a massive contraction project commencing to start fixing the worst problem swath the airport, but with both MDW and ORD limited, and with such a large O&D market, I can;t see either AA or UA pulling back flights unless everyone (ATA, Southwest, AA and UA) does so.
M404 From United States of America, joined Nov 2003, 2214 posts, RR: 5 Reply 22, posted (8 years 9 months 1 week 2 days 10 hours ago) and read 3003 times:
What they are also trying to limit is the ripple effect that late acft have to all other cities that are flown to. This, coupled with ground stops (holds) at downline cities causes tremendous delays nation wide. It is not just an ORD problem. Letting the "marketplace" fix it is far to costly and prolonged an answer.
Less sarcasm and more thought equal better understanding
BigB From United States of America, joined Nov 2003, 593 posts, RR: 3 Reply 23, posted (8 years 9 months 1 week 2 days 9 hours ago) and read 2687 times:
Alphascan From United States of America, joined Nov 2003, 936 posts, RR: 14 Reply 24, posted (8 years 9 months 1 week 2 days 6 hours ago) and read 2511 times:
Airfrnt:
The FAA explicitly stated that the reason for the second rounds of cuts was that while UA and AA had vectored back there flights, it was immediately picked up by other flyers.
The other carriers beg to differ. From Thursday's NY Times:
Smaller airlines at O'Hare have not agreed to trim their schedules, but they will be frozen at current levels or allowed just very modest growth. Ed Faberman, executive director of the Air Carrier Association of America, which represents several small airlines, said the F.A.A. asked American, a unit of the AMR Corporation, and United, a unit of the UAL Corporation, to reduce schedules because "they created these problems by steadily increasing their flights through O'Hare."http://www.nytimes.com/2004/08/19/national/19ohare.html
Now I realize this quote is from a guy with a vested interest (the carriers he represents have a total of 9 flights a day out of ORD), but I have yet to see in print where the FAA or anyone else has claimed other carriers took the slots vacated by UA and AA in the first round.
Unfortunately ORD has now replaced the old DEN as the bane of the United States airspace. Of the 10 or so flights I have taken recently no less the half of them were delayed at DEN or DFW because of planes getting delayed due to weather or congestion at ORD.
DEN and DFW are obviously UA and AA hubs. The ORD congestion disproportionally effects their operations worse than the other carriers. That's the point of the BTC press release. Eventually the marketplace will get fed up with the delays and go to carriers with non-congested hubs. UA and AA won't let that happen so they will fix the problem themselves.
ORD apparently has a massive contraction project commencing to start fixing the worst problem swath the airport, but with both MDW and ORD limited, and with such a large O&D market, I can;t see either AA or UA pulling back flights unless everyone (ATA, Southwest, AA and UA) does so.
You just made a point for the other carriers. Their planes are filled with Chicago O&D passengers whereas the hub carriers are carrying a large percentage of connecting passengers.
I wasn't aware that MDW had flight limits imposed. I did a search on Google and found nothing.
"To he who only has a hammer in his toolbelt, every problem looks like a nail."
25 Cloudy: This is a typical case of a government agency blaming private enterprise for a problem largely caused by themselves. If the FAA had competently upgrad
26 AirFrnt: Now I realize this quote is from a guy with a vested interest (the carriers he represents have a total of 9 flights a day out of ORD), but I have yet
Sponsor Message: 
From United States of America, joined Nov 2003, 936 posts, 
From Germany, joined Jul 2004, 2211 posts, 
From Ireland, joined Jul 2003, 4977 posts, 
From , joined Dec 1969, posts, 
Printer friendly format 
