AmricanShamrok From Ireland, joined May 2008, 2610 posts, RR: 0 Posted (3 months 3 weeks 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 8471 times:
So there have been some big developments over the past few months regarding the expansion of international service at ORD. Increased service levels mean the international terminal is reaching capacity during the peak afternoon hours with 15:30-16:00 being the busiest time this summer (as per my calculations). The chart below illustrates the gate utilisation of the International Terminal 5 for an average Sunday in July this year (times are rounded off to the nearest 30 minutes):
ORD will offer nonstop service to 60 international destinations in 27 countries as indicated below:
***Provisional schedule, subject to change
Also, times are provided as a guide only just to give an idea of frequency (Canadian destinations may be a bit sketchy in this regard – apologies)
The major changes on last summer:
→ New/resuming routes to
Barcelona (Pakistan International Airlines)
Berlin (Air Berlin)
Doha (Qatar Airways)
Düsseldorf (American Airlines)
Nassau (United Express)
Shannon (United Airlines)
Thunder Bay (United Express)
Vienna (Austrian Airlines)
→ United Airlines upgauges Brussels from 767-300ER to 777-200ER
→ Aer Lingus increases Dublin frequency from daily to 11 weekly
→ Lufthansa upgauges its second daily Frankfurt flight from A340-300 to 747-400
→ Cayman Airways goes from winter-only to year-round on Grand Cayman flights
→ United Airlines downguages Hong Kong and Tokyo from 747-400 to 777-200ER
→ Virgin Atlantic Airways downgauges London (LHR) from A340-600 to A330-300
→ American Airlines downgauges Manchester (MAN) from 767-300ER to 757-200
→ United Airlines downguages Munich from 777-200ER to 767-400ER
→ Alitalia change of guage on Rome from 767-300ER to A330-200 following the retirement of the former
→ United Airlines and All Nippon Airways switch the later Tokyo rotation meaning United is now daily and ANA is twice daily
→ Hainan Airlines will begin nonstop Beijing flights in September (excluded from the above timetable as not operational for first five months of season)
thomasphoto60 From United States of America, joined Jan 2000, 3723 posts, RR: 25 Reply 5, posted (3 months 3 weeks 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 8216 times:
Impressive, amazing how ORD has exploded over the past few decades........maybe one day IAH will grow up and be just like ORD.......... (though I doubt I'll still be breathin )
EricR From United States of America, joined Jul 2010, 1454 posts, RR: 1 Reply 6, posted (3 months 3 weeks 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 8216 times:
What's up with M14?
I know there is always talk of expanding T5, but when looking at the chart above, it seems to make more sense at building out FIS facilities in T3 and T1 to accommodate some of the international flights for AA/UA and some of their partners during peak times. If you expand T5, you will end up with a facility that is largely underutilized except between the hours of noon to 6pm. But who knows.....maybe it is a cheaper option that trying to accommodate FIS facilities in T1 & T3.
jcwr56 From United States of America, joined Jul 2012, 221 posts, RR: 0 Reply 7, posted (3 months 3 weeks 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 8046 times:
Not bad AS, not bad at all.
Saturday would have been a better reflection. I rate days from busiest to slowest and Sunday falls in 3 of 7.
We actually still have some room between 15:30 and 16:00 if need be. Now I know people will argue the point but it's not full.
Hainan from a gating perspective does make a difference in September when looking over the entire season between flight schedules and approvals to operate. Matter of fact, from a landing rights standpoint, September is being used as a base line since July, August and September are the same operational wise and immigration throughput is being factored in now.
One thing I did notice, AM will op 2 trips AM670/671 and AM686/687 with both a 737 a/c iso of the E190 and they'll overlap each other.
This terminal was built when AA and UA were using the M11's and 763's.
So when looking at the map, I could gate M13a, M14, M15a, M16a, M17 with 763's. However, with the changes to larger aircraft, it's now gating as M13, M15, M16 and M17a. M14 becomes a dead gate to use.
Cubsrule From United States of America, joined May 2004, 21242 posts, RR: 19 Reply 9, posted (3 months 3 weeks 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 7976 times:
Quoting jcwr56 (Reply 8): M14 becomes a dead gate to use.
Is M14 a no-go even for the YQB, YKF and YXU 50 seaters?
I can't decide whether I miss the tulip or the bowling shoe more
mariner From New Zealand, joined Nov 2001, 22717 posts, RR: 88 Reply 10, posted (3 months 3 weeks 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 7893 times:
Quoting stlgph (Reply 3): Oh yeah, what about Frontier Airlines and their charter flights? Do they just end up wherever?
The (scheduled) Frontier flights to ORD-PUJ/PVR are there. Scheduled ORD-SJD and ORD-HUX are missing.
I don't think that CUN counts because its Apple charter only - Frontier doesn't offer seats independently. And although ORD-MBJ shows on the route map, the Frontier website won't let me book it.
point2point From United States of America, joined Mar 2010, 1961 posts, RR: 1 Reply 11, posted (3 months 3 weeks 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 7878 times:
WOW!
Thanks for all of this work. Quite notable piece put together here.
Even though ORD traffic isn't as high as ATL (usually ranking third or fouth in total pax in the world and second in total operations), and it isn't quite the tops (ranking maybe third or fourth in the U.S.) in total nonstop international destinations or international pax as some other airports around the world, or that it ranks third (after ATL and DEN) in total domestic nonstop destinations - still - ORD has got to be the best balanced airport in the world.
I've pretty much thought that between the number of nonstop destinations both U.S. and international, and the frequencies that it can generate to these destinations, ORD has probably got to be tops in preference for both the O&D to/from the Chicago area, as well as tops among pax needing to transfer, either domestically or internationally.
Now...... ORD has also journeyed a long way these past few years at alleviating delays..... but yet has some ways to go with this. And we know the politics of more gate space. With that, delays and crowding are probably the biggest hindrances at keeping ORD from being the top airport in the world in a number of metrics.
I have to also say that ORD is phenomenal in what it currently does, and if it could solve or even improve upon these current restraints, ORD is the one airport in the U.S. that really could at some point be the preferred airport of more and more of those air travelers out there.
mke717spotter From United States of America, joined Dec 2005, 2310 posts, RR: 5 Reply 12, posted (3 months 3 weeks 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 7746 times:
Well, I really wish LO would bring back ORD-KRK, at least for the summer, but no one seems to think that's going to happen. I know of quite a few people living around Milwaukee that found that service pretty convenient since they were from Krakow.
Will you watch the Cleveland Browns and the Detroit Lions on Sunday? Only if coach Eric Mangini resigned after a loss.
scutfarcus From United States of America, joined May 2000, 352 posts, RR: 1 Reply 13, posted (3 months 3 weeks 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 7745 times:
Pretty cool. Now if they would just put some food options beyond security! I flew out of ORD last year and was shocked to find only a kiosk for food... had doritos for dinner. not cool.
dc9northwest From Romania, joined Feb 2007, 1735 posts, RR: 4 Reply 15, posted (3 months 3 weeks 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 7629 times:
Quoting scutfarcus (Reply 13):
Pretty cool. Now if they would just put some food options beyond security! I flew out of ORD last year and was shocked to find only a kiosk for food... had doritos for dinner. not cool.
They're planning to do just that. The problem? By the time they're done there won't be anything before security except Starbucks (I think) anywhere at ORD. Which for the 2nd busiest airport in the US wouldn't be great...
jcwr56 From United States of America, joined Jul 2012, 221 posts, RR: 0 Reply 16, posted (3 months 3 weeks 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 7589 times:
Quoting scutfarcus (Reply 13): Pretty cool. Now if they would just put some food options beyond security! I flew out of ORD last year and was shocked to find only a kiosk for food... had doritos for dinner. not cool.
By the end of summer (yeah, I know) all food, duty free will be on the airfield side. They are moving the checkpoint.
Quoting Cubsrule (Reply 9): Quoting jcwr56 (Reply 8):M14 becomes a dead gate to use.
Is M14 a no-go even for the YQB, YKF and YXU 50 seaters?
Yes, one suggestion I came up with is to duel park the RJ's within the same gate (staggered) so we're not using an end gate to handle a RJ during peak times.
Cubsrule From United States of America, joined May 2004, 21242 posts, RR: 19 Reply 17, posted (3 months 3 weeks 1 day 13 hours ago) and read 7552 times:
Quoting jcwr56 (Reply 16): Yes, one suggestion I came up with is to duel park the RJ's within the same gate (staggered) so we're not using an end gate to handle a RJ during peak times.
The other approach would be to do what NW did in DTW for a while and bus from a hardstand in Terminals 1, 2 or 3. UA has RJ hardstands and it wouldn't be hard for them. AA is all jet bridge, so a bit harder for them.
I can't decide whether I miss the tulip or the bowling shoe more
AmricanShamrok From Ireland, joined May 2008, 2610 posts, RR: 0 Reply 18, posted (3 months 3 weeks 1 day 13 hours ago) and read 7553 times:
Quoting jfk777 (Reply 2): IS AA86/87 a 777 ORD to LHR but a 763 from LHR to ORD ? Shouldn't that be a 777 ?
Yeah I noticed this when I was compiling the list and it seems it's correct. From looking at the GDS, AA will run AA90 (ORD-LHR) and AA87, AA91 (LHR-ORD) as 763s. So one rotation must be on a W pattern through LHR from another hub.
Quoting stlgph (Reply 3): Oh yeah, what about Frontier Airlines and their charter flights? Do they just end up wherever?
The charter flights aren't listed but the ones F9 sell directly (MBJ, PVR etc.) are.
Quoting jcwr56 (Reply 7): Not bad AS, not bad at all.
Saturday would have been a better reflection. I rate days from busiest to slowest and Sunday falls in 3 of 7.
A lot of my information is coming from your posts on here so my thanks to you! I chose Sunday because I could get the 2x EI rotations, 2x LX rotations and some other more interesting movements in that would not be operating on Saturdays.
_AA_777_MAN From United States of America, joined Oct 2000, 161 posts, RR: 0 Reply 20, posted (3 months 3 weeks 1 day 13 hours ago) and read 7486 times:
Quoting MSPNWA (Reply 14): I hadn't even seen the news of NH's 2nd 77W
I think the schedule shows the 2nd flight as a 77E.
kordcj From United States of America, joined Mar 2011, 72 posts, RR: 0 Reply 21, posted (3 months 3 weeks 1 day 13 hours ago) and read 7484 times:
Quoting MSPNWA (Reply 14): Still, what hurts to see is all those 777s in routes that were 747s not long ago. Miss the Queen . . .
Who would have guessed that LH would become the largest 747 operator at ORD! Times have surely changed. I hope the city is doing something to woo people to move back and use the airport, still a long ways off peak numbers of 2005-07.
The most obvious proof for intelligent life in the universe is that they haven't tried to contact us.
AmricanShamrok From Ireland, joined May 2008, 2610 posts, RR: 0 Reply 24, posted (3 months 3 weeks 1 day 13 hours ago) and read 7375 times:
Quoting brilondon (Reply 22): There is something screwy about this schedule. It should only show flight OO5508 flying ORD departing on MWFSu not daily.
Canadian flights (like many US domestic flights) frequently change their schedules for different days - mostly stupidly changing flight times by just a few minutes on particular days - and that makes it harder to compile a standard weekly timetable.
BlueLine From United States of America, joined Jun 2012, 72 posts, RR: 0 Reply 25, posted (3 months 3 weeks 1 day 13 hours ago) and read 7507 times:
Quoting jcwr56 (Reply 16): Yes, one suggestion I came up with is to duel park the RJ's within the same gate (staggered) so we're not using an end gate to handle a RJ during peak times.
Could the afternoon MQ and OO arrivals come in at one of the T5 remote stands? These flights don't use a jet bridge, and an AA/UA employee bus can be sent over there to bring pax to the terminal. The inbounds go quickly, with it taking more time to stage and store equipment than to deplane and unload baggage.
timberwolf24 From United States of America, joined Jun 2001, 562 posts, RR: 1 Reply 26, posted (3 months 3 weeks 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 7100 times:
That is quite an impressive line up. My fav Chicago Mexican, Chocolate and Coffee all in one place... Even with all of the new routes and new airlines, will T5 be busy enough to support these? I guess time will tell...
ckfred From United States of America, joined Apr 2001, 4654 posts, RR: 1 Reply 28, posted (3 months 3 weeks 17 hours ago) and read 4461 times:
Quoting EricR (Reply 6): I know there is always talk of expanding T5, but when looking at the chart above, it seems to make more sense at building out FIS facilities in T3 and T1 to accommodate some of the international flights for AA/UA and some of their partners during peak times. If you expand T5, you will end up with a facility that is largely underutilized except between the hours of noon to 6pm. But who knows.....maybe it is a cheaper option that trying to accommodate FIS facilities in T1 & T3.
There was a plan back in the late 90s to turn T2 into the UA international/Star terminal and a new T4 (on the site of the current HVAC building) for AA international/oneworld terminal. Then, a new T6, east of T5, would be built for domestic airlines other than AA and UA. My understanding that NW was really against this plan, because it would take away the advantage it had at DTW, since NW passengers arriving from overseas don't have to change terminals for domestic connections that way passengers do at ORD.
Frankly, that plan is far superior to the idea of the western terminal. Certainly, getting passengers, baggage and cargo between the western terminal and Terminals 1, 2, 3, and 5 present some challenges.
The Old World Gateway program and it wasn't only NW that was against the proposal, it was also the Feds because of aircraft movement issues with T5 and T6 towards the end of runway 28 and 22.
Too many planes into small an area.
Quoting AmricanShamrok (Reply 18): Are there "subgates" at M13, M15 and M16? I.e. is there any difference between M13/M13A, M15/M15A, M16/M16A?
strfyr51 From United States of America, joined Apr 2012, 488 posts, RR: 0 Reply 32, posted (3 months 3 weeks 15 hours ago) and read 3830 times:
T5 is hampered by there's the ONLY space available. for an efficient operation another terminal just like Terminal 1 would have to be built OR Built a remote terminal on the south west side near Elmhurst and Irving Park roads. or North side over near Touhy Ave . A lot of area an people would need to be re-accommodated but it could be done. Trouble is? How much is enough??
WROORD From United States of America, joined Mar 2009, 811 posts, RR: 0 Reply 35, posted (3 months 3 weeks 7 hours ago) and read 3252 times:
Quoting Revo1059 (Reply 30): T5 is a mess. Bad design, bad construction and bad management. During the afternoon rush it becomes a zoo.
I agree. Hardly any space by the check ins. Even in the old pre-TSA days what were they thinking that people are going to fly overseas with no bags? Security I can understand why there is no space for that. Nothing past securities with lots of empty space unused. On arrival the endless miles of walking just to be squeezed into immigration lanes....
And again as you exit customs, really no space for meeting your family. Lots of wasted space.
apodino From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 3640 posts, RR: 6 Reply 36, posted (3 months 2 weeks 6 days 18 hours ago) and read 2922 times:
Here is what I think should be done but it would cause some headaches for a while. First...after 32L is closed permanently, build a concourse D in that vicinity as part of Terminal 1 to be used by the United Express Carriers. Then rebuild T2 into a shared international arrivals facility to be used by both SA)">AA and SA)">UA. After the new facility is built, you keep the existing FIS in T5, but also use T5 for all Non SA)">OW, SA carriers. You wouldn't need to build any new terminals, but you would allow everything to stay status quo and help everyone. So here is the breakdown after such a project.
T1
Air Canada
United (Domestic)
USAirways (If no SA)">AA merger)
T2
American (International)
ANA
British Airways
Iberia
Lufthansa
JAL
United (International)
T3
American (Domestic)
USAirways (If merger happens)
T5
Delta
JetBlue
Spirit
Westjet
Air France
Virgin Atlantic
Virgin America
KLM
Any other Skyteam or non alliance carrier I have forgotten.
That's pretty ambitious, BUT My solution would be build on to the concourse at B29 and add 20 more UAX gates
Tear down and rebuild T2 as a Twin to T1. then T3 can have an add on to the east to accommodate 20 more gates the Public Works building should not pose an obstacle.
apodino From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 3640 posts, RR: 6 Reply 39, posted (3 months 2 weeks 6 days 17 hours ago) and read 2854 times:
Quoting strfyr51 (Reply 37): That's pretty ambitious, BUT My solution would be build on to the concourse at B29 and add 20 more UAX gates
I assume you mean B22 since there is no gate B29 as B only goes up to 22.
Quoting stlgph (Reply 38):
A while?
Be better off building a whole new airport.
The only real issue is accomodating DL during the rebuild of T2. Once Concourse D is opened, United Express would be fine. AC would end up in T1, and by then US future should be determined.
apodino From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 3640 posts, RR: 6 Reply 41, posted (3 months 2 weeks 6 days 15 hours ago) and read 2632 times:
Quoting stlgph (Reply 40):
uh...yeah, would love to see this idea of fitting all these widebodies at E & F.
It wouldn't be as bad as you think. I believe there are currently 28 Narrowbody gates in those concourses. Assuming you don't just demolish the whole thing and rebuild (i.e. JetBlue with T5 at JFK, or DL with Terminal A in BOS), you could easily fit about 14 widebodies I would think in the terminal, maybe more (Someone refresh my memory what was in there back in the TWA days). 14 Widebody gates should be able to handle exisiting traffic that those airlines have. But of course a demolition and a rebuild would probably be the better option.
Cubsrule From United States of America, joined May 2004, 21242 posts, RR: 19 Reply 43, posted (3 months 2 weeks 5 days 17 hours ago) and read 2030 times:
Quoting stlgph (Reply 42): This is entirely unfeasible. Like, wow. As I mentioned earlier, build a new airport.
Which part? 6 widebody gates up the outsides of E and F, 2 on each end, and 6-8 767 and smaller gates on the insides is doable and would be roughly as much capacity as Terminal 5.
I can't decide whether I miss the tulip or the bowling shoe more
chexp77w From United States of America, joined Sep 2010, 5 posts, RR: 0 Reply 44, posted (3 months 2 weeks 3 days 7 hours ago) and read 1463 times:
First time posting so be nice but United Express skywest also flys ORD to Monterry, Mex. UA6276 departs ORD at 8:50am arriving at 12:20pm. and departs Monterry, Mex UA6277 at 12:58pm arriving at ORD 4:28pm
jcwr56 From United States of America, joined Jul 2012, 221 posts, RR: 0 Reply 46, posted (3 months 2 weeks 2 days 23 hours ago) and read 1299 times:
Here's another one...Sundays.
I was messing around due to the fact AA is working on getting PEK into ORD after 1600 local time. I can filter specific times and airlines, so outside peak some flights are not being shown.
A few airlines are tweaking schedules so it's always a work in progress.
ckfred From United States of America, joined Apr 2001, 4654 posts, RR: 1 Reply 47, posted (3 months 2 weeks 2 days 16 hours ago) and read 1061 times:
Quoting stlgph (Reply 42): As I mentioned earlier, build a new airport.
Where would you build it? As much as some people think Chicago needs a 3rd airport (Peotone, Gary, Rockford, Milwaukee), no one is suggesting closing ORD.
Unfortunately, you can't do like they did in Atlanta and build a new terminal complex and runway arrangement at ATL, then tear down the old terminal.
You could certainly build a new terminal complex. Build the western terminal with 3 concourses arranged like ATL or DEN, one for UA mainline, one for UA international and other Star Alliance members, and one for UAX. Next tear down T1 and replace it with a new T2 ultimately for DL and the rest of Skyteam, but temporarily for non-Star international arrivals. Tear down T5 and replace it with a new T4 with 3 concourses for AA, AA international and Oneworld partners, and one for Eagle. Next tear down and replace T3 for LCCs and other non-aligned international carriers. Finally tear down T2, the Hilton, ATC tower and parking garage for a new Hilton, parking garage, tower and maybe another hotel. The new T2 and T3 would only have 1 concourse each, but there would be enough room to build 2 additional concourses between new T1 and new T2 and new T3 and new T4 for future expansion.
Additional changes would include CTA Blue line stops for T4, T2/3, and T1 and eventually extending all the way down the center of the Elgin-ORD expressway to Woodfield Mall. I also see splitting (westbound north of the terminal complex and eastbound south of the terminals) and extending the 190 with local lanes serving the terminals and express lanes connecting to the Elgin-ORD Expressway. Finally, move Mannehiem a bit east to allow the construction of an 'end around' taxiway around the end of 28R. I think there would be room for 'end around taxiways on the western edge of the airport around 10L and 9R and with the new consolidated rental car facility the commercial holding lot could be moved to the old rental car lots allowing the construction of a a taxiway around 27L.
All it would take is time, money, and the desire to it.
Sponsor Message: 
From Ireland, joined May 2008, 2610 posts, 
From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 8978 posts, 
From New Zealand, joined Nov 2001, 22717 posts, 
From Romania, joined Feb 2007, 1735 posts, 
From Canada, joined Aug 2005, 3172 posts, 
From China, joined Jan 2013, 38 posts, 
Printer friendly format 
