Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
UA's ORD Hub Showing Its Age?  
User currently offline777fan From United States of America, joined Jan 2006, 2492 posts, RR: 2
Posted (6 years 9 months 1 week 6 days 2 hours ago) and read 7687 times:

Long time, no thread so here goes nothing...

I recently had the pleasure of taking a quick weekend hop over to Chicago for an extended visit with some family, friends, and clients and flew UA (as always) - trip report to come. While waiting for my return flight to BWI to begin boarding, I took some time to walk the length of both the B and C concourses that UA calls home (can't really count the orphaned gates in T2).

At any rate, I couldn't help but notice that IMO, it appears that UA's B and C concourses (terminal 1) really aren't big enough to handle the amount of passengers that transit them on any given day. The gate areas are generally too small (60-80 seats at most gates), the concessions (particularly the restaurants) are woefully short of seating (the Jazz Cafe food court in concourse C is way too small), and the main thoroughfares are extremely narrow. This particular issue becomes evident when pax waiting to board spill into the main walkway. The bathrooms are also heavily congested more often than not.

After recently transiting UA's other hubs at SFO and DEN, I couldn't help but wonder if anyone else (like UA?!) has noticed this and if anyone knows of any plans to address the lack of space at what is supposed to be UA's premier gateway? Whatever they do, I hope they leave the style alone - it's still a great building...



777fan


DC-8 61/63/71 DC-9-30/50 MD-80/82/83 DC-10-10/30 MD-11 717 721/2 732/3/4/5/G/8/9 741/2/4 752 762/3 777 A306/319/20/33 AT
48 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineUadc8contrail From United States of America, joined Sep 2003, 1782 posts, RR: 9
Reply 1, posted (6 years 9 months 1 week 6 days 1 hour ago) and read 7632 times:

777,
i have noticed that alot as well, i spent 12 yrs working there and when we left out of C23 last month, i was in the hall way next to the moving walkway and kept on thinking how did we board dc10s/767s on the east side of the C side from C9-C23...we were on a 757 and it was cramped as hell, i also noticed there is no more space on the floor between the gates as it has been taken over by oversized kiosks. i walked around with my son and actually laughed to myself to see a 777 at gate C29, my god that area around 29-31 was cramped. i knew that helmut had a clause when he designed it that he had all control over changes, but i guess that doesnt apply anymore. a needed immediate change is to get rid of that late 80s era seats....that plastic sucks



bus driver.......move that bus:)
User currently offlineKstateinALB From United States of America, joined Dec 2006, 748 posts, RR: 0
Reply 2, posted (6 years 9 months 1 week 6 days 1 hour ago) and read 7625 times:

Quoting 777fan (Thread starter):
it appears that UA's B and C concourses (terminal 1) really aren't big enough to handle the amount of passengers that transit them on any given day.

I disagree, I think that they do have enough space to handle the amount of passengers, it's just when two international flights board at the same time when you see the biggest issues.

Quoting 777fan (Thread starter):
The gate areas are generally too small (60-80 seats at most gates),

However I do agree with this, usually people have to stand at a gate area 30 minutes before.

Quoting 777fan (Thread starter):
This particular issue becomes evident when pax waiting to board spill into the main walkway.

I think this has to do with people lining up to rush on board when their seating area is called, not as much as not having enough room.

Quoting 777fan (Thread starter):
The bathrooms are also heavily congested more often than not.

I guess it depend's on which ones you go to, for example, the ones in the far part of the B terminal are usually free of people surprisingly.



ALB, DTW, ORD, MDW, MCI, JFK, LGA, LHR, MAD, MSP, IAD, DCA, MCO, ATL, CVG, TUL, MHK, PHL, PIT, DFW, DAL, CLT, IND, AUS,
User currently offline777fan From United States of America, joined Jan 2006, 2492 posts, RR: 2
Reply 3, posted (6 years 9 months 1 week 6 days 1 hour ago) and read 7565 times:

Quoting KstateinALB (Reply 2):
I disagree, I think that they do have enough space to handle the amount of passengers, it's just when two international flights board at the same time when you see the biggest issues.

Try walking down to the semi-circle ends of the C-concourse. Back in the pre-RJ, gate-B22 mega-UAX-expansion days, they used to be home to flights to/from smaller markets (CMH, DSM, IND, on 737s, etc) but are now called upon to routinely handle loaded 757s and A320s.

International flights tend to board from C-16, C18, C18A which thankfully were designed to handle heavies as they have just enough seats in the gate area and are pushed away a bit from the main walkways in the concourse.

I almost forgot to mention the RCCs at ORD...sad, sad, sad.



777fan



DC-8 61/63/71 DC-9-30/50 MD-80/82/83 DC-10-10/30 MD-11 717 721/2 732/3/4/5/G/8/9 741/2/4 752 762/3 777 A306/319/20/33 AT
User currently offlineGigneil From United States of America, joined Nov 2002, 16347 posts, RR: 85
Reply 4, posted (6 years 9 months 1 week 6 days 1 hour ago) and read 7549 times:

Go to anywhere else in ORD and ask yourself this again.

The United terminal is positively heavenly compared to AA's, and certainly anywhere else there.

The concourses are wide and airy, the seating areas spacious and clean. Yes, it might not be as large as needed but it is in drastically better shape than the entire rest of the airport.

UA's SFO facilities are inferior, unless you are referring to the concourse G gates which opened recently. Clearly DEN, open in 1995 and designed for UA, is a superior facility but you'll find the concessions there lacking.

NS


User currently offline777fan From United States of America, joined Jan 2006, 2492 posts, RR: 2
Reply 5, posted (6 years 9 months 1 week 6 days 1 hour ago) and read 7477 times:

Quoting Gigneil (Reply 4):
The United terminal is positively heavenly compared to AA's, and certainly anywhere else there.

The concourses are wide and airy, the seating areas spacious and clean. Yes, it might not be as large as needed but it is in drastically better shape than the entire rest of the airport.

Yes, much better than anything else at ORD although the check in and baggage claim of AA's T3 are in the midst of a nice update.

I beg to differ about SFO - concourse F is plenty wide, has a killer foodcourt with plenty of seating, gate areas with good seating, plenty of big windows, spacious (comparatively speaking to ORD) bathrooms, and a nice (again, by UA standards) Red Carpet Club.


777fan



DC-8 61/63/71 DC-9-30/50 MD-80/82/83 DC-10-10/30 MD-11 717 721/2 732/3/4/5/G/8/9 741/2/4 752 762/3 777 A306/319/20/33 AT
User currently offlineSLCUT2777 From United States of America, joined Dec 2005, 4028 posts, RR: 11
Reply 6, posted (6 years 9 months 1 week 6 days ago) and read 7374 times:

UA's facilities at ORD are MUCH better per say than what DL has at SLC. Now there is a hub facility that is showing its age.


DELTA Air Lines; The Only Way To Fly from Salt Lake City; Let the Western Heritage always be with Delta!
User currently offlineApodino From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 4234 posts, RR: 6
Reply 7, posted (6 years 9 months 1 week 6 days ago) and read 7355 times:

Lets clairify something here. United's Mainline facilities were built for United, and while I agree concession choice isn't great, the concourses are somewhat wide, and I have never had a problem with seating while waiting for a flight.

On the other hand, if you are on an Express flight, there is a very good chance you will be departing from the F concourse in Terminal 2, unless you are lucky enough to be on a 170 or a select EX Plus flight. The F concourse, despite being recently renovated, is a disgrace. The waiting areas are real small, so you can easily be forced to stand. There are not enough gates, so frequently three flights are sharing one gate, and its real easy to end up on the wrong flight. The concessions are a joke. And there is a so called shuttle bus from the c Gates, but you have to walk down a narrow staircase to get there, and there are no escalators. As much as it pains me to say this, they need to take a lesson from USAirways in PHL about how to run a shuttle operation to express. And the shuttle is only for C gates, if you are on the B gates, you are walking for a while. What I think they may want to consider is either extending the B22 pier all the way down Taxiway H, which would be an engineering headache so I doubt it will happen. Or with room being opened by 14R-32L being decomissioned, a new midfield express terminal could be built, and this would also free up gate space in Terminal 2.

SFO is not that bad a hub for United, but again the RJ facilities are inadequate in my opinion. Truthfully speaking, all the UA hubs are subpar for the industry save for DEN, which is a new airport.

I don't think American has bad facilities at all. The Eagle facility in G is real nice, plus H and K are easy on the eyes and are in somewhat good shape, plus there is a reasonably sized food court as well.

If you want to start a discussion about which airlines hubs are the best, taking the legacy carriers here is the order I would rank them:

1. Northwest: As much as they suck in many areas, DTW and MSP are two very fine facilities and never have delay problems at all except for recently at MSP due to runway construction. MEM is outdated, but its still better than many places.
2. Continental: Even with all of EWR's headaches, the terminal itself is a fine facility, IAH is great, and CLE is real nice as well.
3. American: ORD is not a bad facility. Even though A and C in DFW are outdated, the skytrain makes connections a breeze, plus the airport can handle a lot of traffic. MIA has improved a lot with the north terminal.
4. Delta: JFK brings them down a bit. That terminal is a dump and needs to go. SLC is a bit outdated as well. But ATL has improved a lot and its not that bad, but needs a better RJ facility. CVG is their best facility. The comair terminal is great but it needs jetways.
5. USAirways: Would be higher if not for PHL. PHL has all its problems, but does have a great RJ terminal that is easy to navigate. The concessions in PHL are pretty good too. CLT, PHX, and LAS are all great hubs, and connections in any of them are a breeze, and all three are also great O and D airports as well.
6. United. See above.


User currently offlineUadc8contrail From United States of America, joined Sep 2003, 1782 posts, RR: 9
Reply 8, posted (6 years 9 months 1 week 5 days 23 hours ago) and read 7289 times:

Quoting SLCUT2777 (Reply 6):
UA's facilities at ORD are MUCH better per say than what DL has at SLC. Now there is a hub facility that is showing its age.

SLC
your kidding right????....slc is WAY BETTER airport to connect in than ord,,,,even a bad wx day in slc is hands down easier to navigate......every mainline concourse in slc is much wider less cluttered with the kiosks than ord hands down...even the E gates are alot easier to wait in than the F concourse at ord



bus driver.......move that bus:)
User currently offlinePanAm330 From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 2669 posts, RR: 9
Reply 9, posted (6 years 9 months 1 week 5 days 23 hours ago) and read 7287 times:

Quoting Apodino (Reply 7):
3. American: ORD is not a bad facility. Even though A and C in DFW are outdated, the skytrain makes connections a breeze, plus the airport can handle a lot of traffic. MIA has improved a lot with the north terminal.

Lest you forget AA's multi-billion dollar terminal at JFK. It's absolutely incredible. I wish AA flew JFK-SYR so I could actually utilize this facility.

Quoting Apodino (Reply 7):
4. Delta: JFK brings them down a bit. That terminal is a dump and needs to go. SLC is a bit outdated as well. But ATL has improved a lot and its not that bad, but needs a better RJ facility. CVG is their best facility. The comair terminal is great but it needs jetways.

Am I seriously the only one that likes JFK? It's almost certainly because the Worldport is unique, not because it's a passenger-friendly facility. The other terminal (2) is a total dump, though. Needs to go. As for ATL, it may be boring in terms of architecture, but it's one of the nicest, easiest facilities I've ever come across. Sure, the RJ gates could use a little organizing, but given the sheer volume of what goes in and out of there, it's not half bad. CVG is just fine, if not for that annoying shuttle. I wish there were an underground walkway, similar to CLE's.


User currently offlineCoal From United States of America, joined Aug 2006, 1992 posts, RR: 9
Reply 10, posted (6 years 9 months 1 week 5 days 23 hours ago) and read 7253 times:

I'm not very familiar with the terminals are ORD, but here are my  twocents 

Last June I arrived from SIN via NRT on UA and thought the terminal looked very nice and new. However, the terminal from where I took the ORD-MIA flight looked very old and tired, and had way too much "UA blue" paint everywhere.

Cheers
Coal



Nxt Flts: VA SYD-CBR-SYD | VA SYD-OOL-SYD | JQ SYD-MEL | VA MEL-CBR-SYD | DL SYD-LAX-ATL-MIA | B6 FLL-DCA-BOS | DL BOS-L
User currently offlineCkfred From United States of America, joined Apr 2001, 5179 posts, RR: 1
Reply 11, posted (6 years 9 months 1 week 5 days 21 hours ago) and read 7066 times:

Quoting 777fan (Reply 3):
Try walking down to the semi-circle ends of the C-concourse. Back in the pre-RJ, gate-B22 mega-UAX-expansion days, they used to be home to flights to/from smaller markets (CMH, DSM, IND, on 737s, etc) but are now called upon to routinely handle loaded 757s and A320s.

Actually, the semi-circle for B22 used to be for UAX turboprops. I know I used to see several British turboprops parked along there, and possible som Convair 580s. That was back in the late 80s and early 90s.


User currently offlineSparkingWave From South Korea, joined Jun 2005, 670 posts, RR: 0
Reply 12, posted (6 years 9 months 1 week 5 days 21 hours ago) and read 7031 times:

My personal theory is that the facilities were designed to be a little smaller so that people could warm each other up with their own respiration as well as the central heating. When Chicago gets cold, its gets COLD! And feeling that cold blast in the jetway to the aircraft while boarding in the dead of winter is nothing to sneeze at!

The other bad thing is that Starbucks and McDonald's gets really crowded in the morning while people are waiting for their flights. I can't wait forever for my sausage biscuit and lowfat latte!

In the end, while the individual gates seem small there seems to be a good job of aircraft turnover to minimize overcrowding. It can even be fun to people watch there. And that underground neon walkway is the coolest thing I've seen at an airport!



Flights to the moon and all major space stations. At Pan Am, the sky is no longer the limit!
User currently offlinePavlovsDog From Norway, joined Sep 2005, 657 posts, RR: 0
Reply 13, posted (6 years 9 months 1 week 5 days 18 hours ago) and read 6931 times:

Anybody know what's going on the proposed West Terminal? Will United be the primary tenant there?

http://egov.cityofchicago.org/webpor...WebPortal/COC_ATTACH/final_alp.pdf


User currently offline777fan From United States of America, joined Jan 2006, 2492 posts, RR: 2
Reply 14, posted (6 years 9 months 1 week 5 days 13 hours ago) and read 6719 times:

Quoting Coal (Reply 10):
Last June I arrived from SIN via NRT on UA and thought the terminal looked very nice and new. However, the terminal from where I took the ORD-MIA flight looked very old and tired, and had way too much "UA blue" paint everywhere.

Sounds like you arrived in the "newer" T5 and transferred over to T1 to connect. It's somewhat ironic that the "blue" paint you referred to has remained pretty much as is since the terminal was built over 15 years ago. It's almost as if the color scheme for UA's new livery originated from the color of the B and C concourses at ORD.

Quoting Ckfred (Reply 11):
Actually, the semi-circle for B22 used to be for UAX turboprops.

Yes, I'm aware of that - I was referring to the C concourse semi-circles being used for smaller markets that received jet service before the RJ invasion. I can remember B22 hosting flights to/from MKE (BAe 146), MLI, MAD, etc.

Quoting SparkingWave (Reply 12):
When Chicago gets cold, its gets COLD! And feeling that cold blast in the jetway to the aircraft while boarding in the dead of winter is nothing to sneeze at!

Tell me about it. My most recent flight to ORD from HNL (nonstop UA1) in February landed about 15 minutes early but took about 30 minutes to deplane because the jetway at C17 had a one-inch thick coating of ice on it. When I left HNL thevening before, it was sunny and 81 degrees. Upon landing at ORD at 5:05am the next morning, the temperature (not including wind chill) was -2 F. Naturally, our redeye flight was the first to use the gate that morning and the ground crews (who were struggling with the temps and blowing snow) hadn't had a chance to unfreeze the jetway. Suffice to say, the 83 degree temperature change was quite a shock (understatement of a lifetime).

Quoting PavlovsDog (Reply 13):
Will United be the primary tenant there?

That's one of the things I was wondering when I started the thread. I can't imagine they would given the time it'd take to shuttle over there. As many UA ORDers know, a connection from, say C4 to B7 can be tight enough and that's with the underground walkway! As Apodino pointed out, connecting from T1 to T2 (F concourse) is ridiculous (I've been lucky enough to only have to do it once).



777fan



DC-8 61/63/71 DC-9-30/50 MD-80/82/83 DC-10-10/30 MD-11 717 721/2 732/3/4/5/G/8/9 741/2/4 752 762/3 777 A306/319/20/33 AT
User currently offlineLACA773 From United States of America, joined Nov 2004, 4002 posts, RR: 2
Reply 15, posted (6 years 9 months 1 week 5 days 13 hours ago) and read 6661 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting KstateinALB (Reply 2):
I think that they do have enough space to handle the amount of passengers, it's just when two international flights board at the same time when you see the biggest issues

I was on UA 129 last evening which was operated with a 319 and the boarding area @ C21 was tight with all the standbys.
I think they have a very nice terminal and they are still updating it a lot. I love the new departure and arrival boards they have. The only thing I see a major problem with is when there are over two hundred people clearing security and tney only have one area open. That's a pain in the damn tuckus.
If UA might try and concentrate on keeping the international departures grouped together during the evening peak to Europe and the UK and late morning to the Far East, it might help things. To expand on that, remove some of these gates and make them dual jetway gates like C10A & C10B. Then when they are not being used for international departures they can be used for heavies going to LAX/SFO/SEA/Hawaii.

Quoting Gigneil (Reply 4):
Go to anywhere else in ORD and ask yourself this again.

The United terminal is positively heavenly compared to AA's, and certainly anywhere else there.

Agree 100 %.

LACA773


User currently offlineSLCUT2777 From United States of America, joined Dec 2005, 4028 posts, RR: 11
Reply 16, posted (6 years 9 months 1 week 5 days 12 hours ago) and read 6639 times:

Quoting Uadc8contrail (Reply 8):
your kidding right????....slc is WAY BETTER airport to connect in than ord,,,,even a bad wx day in slc is hands down easier to navigate......every mainline concourse in slc is much wider less cluttered with the kiosks than ord hands down...even the E gates are alot easier to wait in than the F concourse at ord

Please read reply #7 above:

Quoting Apodino (Reply 7):
Delta: JFK brings them down a bit. That terminal is a dump and needs to go. SLC is a bit outdated as well. But ATL has improved a lot and its not that bad, but needs a better RJ facility. CVG is their best facility. The comair terminal is great but it needs jetways.

SLC needs in my estimation (it is my home airport--and an embarrassment to me for my community!) a substantial overhaul. Thankfully it is in the works...



DELTA Air Lines; The Only Way To Fly from Salt Lake City; Let the Western Heritage always be with Delta!
User currently offlineUnitedFirst From United States of America, joined Jun 2001, 478 posts, RR: 2
Reply 17, posted (6 years 9 months 1 week 5 days 12 hours ago) and read 6585 times:

Quoting 777fan (Reply 3):
Try walking down to the semi-circle ends of the C-concourse. Back in the pre-RJ, gate-B22 mega-UAX-expansion days, they used to be home to flights to/from smaller markets (CMH, DSM, IND, on 737s, etc) but are now called upon to routinely handle loaded 757s and A320s

Isn't the B18-B22 'arc' almost entirely used for Ted flights now?

Certainly the color scheme and Ted paraphenalia everywhere would suggest that...


User currently offline777fan From United States of America, joined Jan 2006, 2492 posts, RR: 2
Reply 18, posted (6 years 9 months 1 week 5 days 12 hours ago) and read 6554 times:

Quoting UnitedFirst (Reply 17):
Isn't the B18-B22 'arc' almost entirely used for Ted flights now?

Nope, I've seen Ted flights parked all over the place although yes, it seems that many of them congregate in that area. UA's ORD map page doesn't denote a particular gate area for Ted. Likewise, a quick check of Ted flights from ORD to LAS shows that they're pretty much all over the B concourse: B11, B18, B22, and B5.

http://www.united.com/page/article/0,6722,1113,00.html


777fan



DC-8 61/63/71 DC-9-30/50 MD-80/82/83 DC-10-10/30 MD-11 717 721/2 732/3/4/5/G/8/9 741/2/4 752 762/3 777 A306/319/20/33 AT
User currently offlineAlgoz From United Kingdom, joined Aug 2004, 130 posts, RR: 0
Reply 19, posted (6 years 9 months 1 week 5 days 11 hours ago) and read 6347 times:

If you want to see crap facilities (UA or otherwise) come to LHR......

User currently offlineKstateinALB From United States of America, joined Dec 2006, 748 posts, RR: 0
Reply 20, posted (6 years 9 months 1 week 5 days 11 hours ago) and read 6030 times:

Quoting 777fan (Reply 3):
Try walking down to the semi-circle ends of the C-concourse

Well the one semi circle starting at C1 is primarily Express nowadays, the opposite side gets the mainline flight as said above. Thats a tough area,b ut some other gates do have enough room IMO.

Quoting Apodino (Reply 7):
The F concourse, despite being recently renovated, is a disgrace.

It is, I was there a week ago or so, and unfortunetly it felt like the air conditioning is non existent. However, the museum they have there now is great to see after a flight. Really cool.

Quoting UnitedFirst (Reply 17):
Isn't the B18-B22 'arc' almost entirely used for Ted flights now?

Sometimes, I flew on a UA 737 and we arrived and departed from gate B19. I also arrived in the same area from a UA mainline flight.



ALB, DTW, ORD, MDW, MCI, JFK, LGA, LHR, MAD, MSP, IAD, DCA, MCO, ATL, CVG, TUL, MHK, PHL, PIT, DFW, DAL, CLT, IND, AUS,
User currently offlineXtoler From United States of America, joined Sep 2007, 953 posts, RR: 0
Reply 21, posted (6 years 9 months 1 week 5 days 9 hours ago) and read 5528 times:

Working, I'm usually in and out of the tip of the F gates. God forbid a long layover there, not a whole lot to do, but at least my per diem kicks in. That's a laugh.

Commuting from RIC back to DEN and I try not to go through ORD if I can help it, but if I can't get out of IAD, what other options do I have from RIC? Oh, as an F/A for a certain regional airline my benefits covered UA, US, and AA. I'm quite familiar with ORD, especially the UA side. It's bad enough waiting to get on a plane, even worse spending the night there. Yeah, I could fork out half a paycheck, even with my benefits for a hotel room, or stay there for the next aircraft smoking to DEN and actually get on it. If the seats at the gates had armrests you could raise up and sleep on, I may find it an okay airport. ORD just plain out sucks. The retro architecture is cool, but I can only take so much. I hear the United crew room is nice, but I'm not about to sneak down there as I'm considered a scab.

The first taste I had of ORD was back in '90 right after I graduated high school and before I went to the USAF. I was flying from RIC to LAX to visit my grandparents. It sucked back then, and it still sucks now. If you have a tight connection, especially if you have to go to the international terminal, I feel for you. As far as a well planned airport, and convenience to gates, it's second to none other than EWR to fly in and out of. The place just plane sucks!!!!!!!



EMB145 F/A, F/E, J41 F/A, F/E, because my wife clipped my wings, armchair captain
User currently offlineTheflcowboy From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 405 posts, RR: 0
Reply 22, posted (6 years 9 months 1 week 5 days 8 hours ago) and read 5214 times:

I combat the problem of ORD, its congstion & delays by flying to MKE. The drive time from MKE to where I go in Chicago (Lake Forest) is less time than it takes for most flights to clear the active and sit on the taxiway waiting for a gate.  Smile


A318, A320, A332, A333, B1900, B722, B732, B733, B734, B735, B737, B738, B772, CR1, CR2, CR7, CR9, MD80, MD81, MD82, MD8
User currently offlineAirportPlan From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 469 posts, RR: 3
Reply 23, posted (6 years 9 months 1 week 5 days 7 hours ago) and read 4852 times:

Quoting PavlovsDog (Reply 13):
Anybody know what's going on the proposed West Terminal? Will United be the primary tenant there?

Currently no airline tenant has committed to the West Terminal. What you see on the Airport Layout Plan drawing is the extent that the terminal has been developed. There are several other possible long range terminal projects in the pipeline at ORD, but nothing will be firmed up until after the first new runway opens next year, the FAA flight cap is lifted and pressure builds for additional gate space.


User currently offlineUAL777UK From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2005, 3356 posts, RR: 1
Reply 24, posted (6 years 9 months 1 week 5 days 7 hours ago) and read 4844 times:

I agree that if your at the C Gates and two international widebodies are going, it can be a little busy, but hell, fine me an airport that isn't when that happens.

My answer.........stay in the RCC until the last minute you can then come to the gate.


25 Halls120 : No need to go that far. Just come to IAD and UA's "temporary" C/D terminals and you can experience a true low rent experience. By happy with what you
26 RwSEA : I don't mind UA's terminal too much, but my biggest complaint is the concessions. Given that I'm spending seemingly more and more time at ORD (thanks
27 COA735 : The B6 terminal at JFK in the AM is a zoo also. My girlfriend grabed on to my arm at one point.
28 Flybynight : It seems like I've spent more time at ORD than at home! What I always notice is how hot it is in there on a warm summer day. Sucks. All that glass. Th
29 United Airline : ORD is still very new I think
30 Gigneil : It opened in 1942. NS
31 BlatantEcho : B & C seem so dark at night. The facility is nice enough, but it's nothing to write home about.
32 747fan : Well, it depends on which terminal you're referring to. As Gigneil stated, the actual airport opened in 1942, but didn't have a large amount of pax t
33 Ytib : The United terminal opened in 1987. As someone who use to be through there quite often, I find it cold in the winter and very warm in the summer. Mov
34 Cubsrule : Unlikely. If Terminal 6 ever gets built, that will permit Skyteam and unattached carriers to vacate Terminal 2. Terminal 2 would then be replaced wit
35 RedTailDTW : Actually I could see it going this way. Terminal 2 would be replaced with a brand new Regional Jet facility consolidating all express to the new Term
36 Cubsrule : Putting an FIS facility in Terminal 1 without gutting it would be darn near impossible. That's why they have to put it in (new) T-2.
37 RedTailDTW : Oh Yeah, totally skipped that part! Now your idea makes a little more sense... Mason
38 UA772IAD : ORD is like heaven compared to LAX or IAD. I would have to say LAX is the worst, with the NRT, SYD 744 and LHR 777 boarding out of 74/76/77 there is n
39 Jfrworld : Umm, I disagree. Although, I think UA's SFO terminal needs some warmer colors and nicer carpet (the gray, blue, and white) seems a bit cold, but the
40 UA772IAD : SFO inferior? Maybe a decade ago, but not today. Sure it could use some new carpeting, sure the architecure is 80s, but its better than ANY of the oth
41 Gigneil : SFO could certainly benefit from new carpet and colors, and, idk, readable gate displays? NS
42 Halls120 : UA's nicest domestic RCC, maybe. The Tokyo RCC kicks ass.
43 McMax : I fly AA connecting through ORD a bit, and am always struck by how crowded H and K are all the time. The terminals are narrow, and when I'm often rus
44 KstateinALB : They do have a couple sit downs, Chili's is in concouse B, as well as Bergstrom's (sp.?) in the C Concouse. I get Chili's all the time because in rea
45 Post contains images FlyBoy84 : I fly to or through ORD at least a couple of times a year and Terminal 1 still feels great to me! The only thing that baffles me is that it seems that
46 Sxf24 : SLC is an easy to navigate and well maintained facility. It can get a little crowded, especially in the E Gates or the high C/D gates with multiple f
47 777fan : That would be great! No doubt, although every time I fly pay a visit, it's packed to the point where you have to fight to get a seat. The fill-it-you
48 Flightopsguy : All of ORD is overstuffed. Check out the OMP (ORD Modernization Program) websites, and you will see on the eastern part of the field a number of paral
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
AA/UA ORD-ORF posted Thu Sep 20 2007 05:03:35 by Highliner2
UA: ORD-MSY All Mainline Eff. 10/29 posted Fri Aug 10 2007 19:48:28 by MSYtristar
UA ORD-HNL A 747-400 Today (Mar 24) posted Fri Mar 23 2007 19:29:48 by Brick
UA ORD-ATH-ORD posted Wed Jan 17 2007 01:02:18 by 1981
Has UA Repainted Any Of Its 2-class 777s? posted Wed Jan 10 2007 04:57:32 by Tallguy14
UA's ORD-ASE Weight Restricted? posted Thu Jan 4 2007 17:38:32 by LHUSA
UA ORD-KIX FLT Has Radio Problem posted Thu Oct 26 2006 00:25:33 by TPAPDX
UA's ORD-HKG Weight Restriction? posted Wed Oct 18 2006 16:03:22 by SkyCruiser
UA ORD Customer Service Falling Apart posted Sat Mar 18 2006 18:48:58 by GoAllegheny
How Is UA's ORD-HKG Doing? posted Mon Jan 2 2006 06:07:27 by Collegestud