Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
United's Delay Problem = O'Hare?  
User currently offlineKonaB777 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Posted (13 years 5 months 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 1204 times:

We all know United is one of the most delay prone airlines in the USA. We also know that O'Hare is United's home base, and the vast majority of its flights go through O'Hare somehow. Disregarding United's other problems, do you think O'Hare plays a very big role in United's delay problem? Yeah, I know American also has an immense presence in O'Hare, but American did isloate its flights out of O'Hare so ORD wouldn't f*** up its system, and United hasn't (and really can't).

Who agrees?

6 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineAirlinelover From United States of America, joined Jun 2001, 5580 posts, RR: 22
Reply 1, posted (13 years 5 months 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 1183 times:

Me. I have never been to O'hare, and unless it is life and death, I never will go there or through there..

Chris



Lets do some sexy math. We add you, subtract your clothes, divide your legs and multiply
User currently offlineKonaB777 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 2, posted (13 years 5 months 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 1177 times:

I don't blame you.

User currently offlineLsjef From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 3, posted (13 years 5 months 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 1174 times:

Yes, O'hare is enormously responsible for UAL's delay problems. But, underlying this is the fact that UAL management (unlike AAL's) has been ineffective at adjusting their schedules to minimize these delays.

More generally, this points out the serious deficiencies of over-developed hubs like ORD. Point-to-point is a far superior means of accomodating travel needs.


User currently offlineDCA-ROCguy From United States of America, joined Apr 2000, 4528 posts, RR: 33
Reply 4, posted (13 years 5 months 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 1169 times:

Yes, yes, and yes. As I've written in a couple of other threads the past couple of days, O'Hare's snowflake runway layout is an inefficient nightmare. The same piece of property, laid out like DFW, could support double or more the traffic.

Fortunately, Mayor Daley this summer proposed just that--to rip up most of O'Hare's runways in sequence and reconfigure them into a layout that is identical to DFW's, which is the most efficient and capacious in the world. It would only require adding one new net runway, which is much more politically feasible (and operationally sound) than adding two runways to the existing nightmare layout.

Whether Democrat Daley gets his plan past the Republican suburban-NIMBY-dominated state gov't is another question. I argued in the other threads that AA and UA should play hardball if the NIMBYs delay the project: either stand down, or we take thousands of jobs, millions of passengers, and billions of dollars out of Illinois.

AA has STL and DFW to absorb traffic, and UA has DEN and IAD. It would not be difficult for them to move, say 10 million domestic pax apiece from O'Hare to their other hubs. All of these airports except DEN, which doesn't need one, are in the process of building approved-and-stamped-by-the-FAA runways. It's time to rumble with the Suburban O'Hare Commission.

That's how important Daley's plan is to the future of O'Hare, Illinois' largest economic engine, which will continue to lose traffic unless its runway capacity is substantially expanded. I'm a Republican and don't like Daley's politics, but boy is he right in a big way about O'Hare. UA and AA should throw all their political weight behind O'Hare reconfiguration.

Jim



Need a new airline paint scheme? Better call Saul! (Bass that is)
User currently offlineLsjef From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 5, posted (13 years 5 months 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 1159 times:

ORD may not be layed out in the most efficient design, yet, for years, it was the world's busiest airport, right? And it's still right up there at the top with ATL and DFW...in fact, #1 for the start of this year, by 3%+.

As for leaving ORD...the capacity is there and will never be abandoned, especially given the importance of the Chicago economy. Yes, BigAir will divert more connections to other growing hubs, but the people of Chicago can be well served by ORD in it's present runway configuration, without ratcheting it up into mega-ORD.


User currently offlinePenguinflies From United States of America, joined Apr 2000, 990 posts, RR: 0
Reply 6, posted (13 years 5 months 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 1152 times:

Just pick a random month on the DOT on-time satistic website:

I picked Jan 2001

Origin flights from DEN

8500+ Flights Scheduled
2000+ Delayed

witht the exact numbers in there, it came out to 24% of UA's total flights were delayed in DEN

Origin flights from ORD
11900+ Flights Scheduled
2000+ Delayed

18% of total flights delayed at ORD.

ORD may not be able to grow, but DEN has bigger problems than capacity.


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...
United And AA @ O'hare posted Sat Mar 20 2004 02:00:16 by Trijetfan1
United DELAY'S posted Wed Aug 2 2000 02:30:27 by ASPEN1
Made Up United Express Weather Delay posted Thu Feb 8 2007 19:22:05 by 787KQ
United Flt 95 6 Hour Delay Today! posted Thu Jun 8 2006 06:19:39 by N62NA
United Has To Delay Second LAX-LHR Service posted Fri Feb 3 2006 20:03:19 by N1120A
Ryanair - Four Day Delay! (Not FR's Problem!) posted Sat Dec 18 2004 11:07:21 by Gilesdavies
United And O'Hare - More Competition? posted Mon Dec 15 2003 18:25:25 by Ord747cle
O'Hare Without United posted Fri Feb 21 2003 01:55:46 by American 767
Fire Ar O'Hare Int'l United Terminal posted Mon Jun 28 1999 20:01:07 by DeltaAir
United 777-200 At Buffalo? posted Thu Mar 27 2008 19:02:41 by UAopsMGR