Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
What's Next For ORD  
User currently offlineORD2010 From United States of America, joined Sep 2013, 105 posts, RR: 0
Posted (1 year 2 months 6 days 14 hours ago) and read 22558 times:

Hello everyone! This is my first post on Airliners and I'm so excited to be on here!

ORD is in my opinion hands down the best airport in the world, It has had a fantastic 2012 with new carriers and returning ones: Austrian, Airberlin, Qatar, Hainan and new routes from Shannon to Dusseldorf to name a few from its two home carriers, as well as newly announced Edinburgh from 2014 by UA. But what is next? Has ORD reached its peak destination wise? I know EK has been beating around the ORD bush for years now (even filing to begin W13 service and then withdrawing). Will they ever finally decide to come? They complain about competition, but does it really have that much at ORD with the name EK carries? Look at QR, their ORD service wasn't meant to be daily and on a 787, and not too far in they kept the 773 and went daily. Hainan is going Daily next year (more than they originally had planned the route with, 4x's weekly) and that was announced days after its first flight! So what is next? will we see the Star Alliance carriers of Asia jump in there, rumor is BR is looking into it. With a second 773 from ANA coming in daily and OZ going daily for a time this summer (I suspect equipment shortage due to SFO isn't allowing the daily to stick around). Where will the asian market come from next? South America is a very underserved area from ORD, while more logical for airlines to fly these routes from southern hubs, do people from the midwest really want to connect in Texas or Florida? Africa, with the 788 could we maybe see Royal Air Maroc and ET go for a couple of weekly flights into ORD. Will we ever see OSL/LIS/BCN flights and the return of MXP? T5 is set to be ready from its renovations soon this year, but T5 is jam packed, will a new international terminal be coming at last? A new car rental and parking facility has been approved and began construction off site and will have connections via the airport tram. The runways are coming in well and the south tower began construction, they are gearing up to make this the most efficient and important hub in the US with pax numbers up and international tourism in Chicago as a whole up. My outlook is:

EK finally launches daily 773 service to DXB

9W launches daily connections to India via AUH (already rumored) with a 773

BR goes 5x weekly to TPE with a 777

one of the Russian carriers returns, I think SU with a 773 4-5xs weekly (very large russian population here over 400k.)

JJ launches daily GRU (most likely) or GIG 773 with a JV with AA now that they will be OW soon.

ET 2xs weekly to ADD 788.

maybe a 380 upgrade from EY, BA, LH or KE soon? It's about time.

What do you guys think is next for ORD? Sorry for any mistakes in the post!

253 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlinefinnishway From Finland, joined Jul 2012, 313 posts, RR: 0
Reply 1, posted (1 year 2 months 6 days 13 hours ago) and read 22553 times:

A380 & ORD has been discussed before. A few years ago ORD wasn't "A380 ready" and I don't know if it still is. It has also been discussed that BA or LH would be most likely carriers to operate the superjumbo to ORD.

User currently offlineORD2010 From United States of America, joined Sep 2013, 105 posts, RR: 0
Reply 2, posted (1 year 2 months 6 days 13 hours ago) and read 22478 times:

It is set to be 380 ready soon with the new taxi ways and runways, but with LH planning the 748i for its ORD route will the 380 ever jump in? I believe BA downgraded one of its dailies to a 772 instead of twice daily 744's. Do you think EY would ever bring it to ORD? Sorry if this has been covered, but I wanted to add it into there.

User currently offlineAABB777 From United States of America, joined Oct 2007, 588 posts, RR: 7
Reply 3, posted (1 year 2 months 6 days 13 hours ago) and read 22358 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Regarding QR service to ORD, the flight was meant to launch daily and with a 777 from day one. However, because of aircraft availability the ORD flight started at 3x weekly before going daily in mid-June. A 787 was never going to operate ORD as QR 787's lack crew rest facilities for ULH flights (USA).

User currently offlineORD2010 From United States of America, joined Sep 2013, 105 posts, RR: 0
Reply 4, posted (1 year 2 months 6 days 13 hours ago) and read 22304 times:

Quoting AABB777 (Reply 3):
Regarding QR service to ORD, the flight was meant to launch daily and with a 777 from day one. However, because of aircraft availability the ORD flight started at 3x weekly before going daily in mid-June. A 787 was never going to operate ORD as QR 787's lack crew rest facilities for ULH flights (USA).


Sorry about that, I can't remember where I read that it was meant to be a 787, it seemed a bit off to me but it makes sense that it wasn't true. Does anyone know what the loads are like for QR? as well as TK (CEO did say he wanted to launch a second daily ORD)


User currently offlinejcwr56 From United States of America, joined Jul 2012, 539 posts, RR: 1
Reply 5, posted (1 year 2 months 6 days 13 hours ago) and read 22310 times:

Alot of what you've written has already been touched upon and it will still be some time before we see the A380 into ORD. It's now strictly a facilities issue after 10/28C opens up next month. LH will start their 748i on LH430 eff. 27OCT.

With Chicago's goal to be a top 5 destination city for international travelers within the U.S by 2020 (currently 9th). The city continues to be very active seeking out carriers to start and expand service.

Looking at S14 June, July and August to S13 same period. As of now, there will be an additional 22 flights per week based on current airlines operating only. Will we see more, probably. How many, that remains to be seen.

[Edited 2013-09-20 08:25:12]

User currently offlinestlgph From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 9497 posts, RR: 26
Reply 6, posted (1 year 2 months 6 days 13 hours ago) and read 22262 times:

Quoting jcwr56 (Reply 5):
With Chicago's goal to be a top 5 destination city for international travelers within the U.S by 2020 (currently 9th). The city continues to be very active seeking out carriers to start and expand service.

That international terminal is going to need a little love, first.


On another note, when it comes to ORD, always nice to see a little love from hometown carrier, United.



if assumptions could fly, airliners.net would be the world's busiest airport
User currently offlineapodino From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 4304 posts, RR: 6
Reply 7, posted (1 year 2 months 6 days 12 hours ago) and read 22212 times:

Quoting jcwr56 (Reply 5):
Alot of what you've written has already been touched upon and it will still be some time before we see the A380 into ORD. It's now strictly a facilities issue after 10/28C opens up next month. LH will start their 748i on LH430 eff. 27OCT

Thats great news, and that runway will help a lot as it will allow 10L-28R to be a strictly departures runway and not have to wait for landing traffic. My question is, what is the timeline on 10R-28L, which is also under construction, and then the construction timeline for 9C-27C? after which the 14-32's will be decommissioned.


User currently offlineORD2010 From United States of America, joined Sep 2013, 105 posts, RR: 0
Reply 8, posted (1 year 2 months 6 days 12 hours ago) and read 22181 times:

Quoting stlgph (Reply 6):
That international terminal is going to need a little love, first.


On another note, when it comes to ORD, always nice to see a little love from hometown carrier, United.


T5 is set to finish its renovation this fall with many new stores and restaurants making it far better than before and a walk through duty free like those in Europe. But space is tight in there especially in the peak hours, new gates or a remote concourse have to be added soon, not later. I agree, it is nice to finally see UA and AA paying some more attention to ORD.

Quoting jcwr56 (Reply 5):

Alot of what you've written has already been touched upon and it will still be some time before we see the A380 into ORD. It's now strictly a facilities issue after 10/28C opens up next month. LH will start their 748i on LH430 eff. 27OCT.

With Chicago's goal to be a top 5 destination city for international travelers within the U.S by 2020 (currently 9th). The city continues to be very active seeking out carriers to start and expand service.

Looking at S14 June, July and August to S13 same period. As of now, there will be an additional 22 flights per week based on current airlines operating only. Will we see more, probably. How many, that remains to be seen.

Wasn't aware that the 748i was finally scheduled in there, it is great news for ORD and LH. I have read about the 2020 plan and it is great, this year alone the number of international tourist rose for Chicago compared to last years international numbers, mainly from Asia. Could we see another Chinese carrier step in? What are the 22 additional compared to this summer, flights and carriers if you don't mind? I know ORD is closing the gap on ATL slowly. Exciting times at ORD. Any new carriers? I know El Al wants to return.


User currently offlinestlgph From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 9497 posts, RR: 26
Reply 9, posted (1 year 2 months 6 days 12 hours ago) and read 22092 times:

Quoting ORD2010 (Reply 8):

It'll be interesting to see how that pans out - expand T5 or there could be a totally "off the cuff" idea of building a smaller terminal catering to flights from RJ's up to 757's, leaving the T5 gates to the widebodies.



if assumptions could fly, airliners.net would be the world's busiest airport
User currently onlineadamh8297 From United States of America, joined Dec 2012, 1009 posts, RR: 0
Reply 10, posted (1 year 2 months 6 days 12 hours ago) and read 22057 times:

Quoting ORD2010 (Thread starter):
ORD is in my opinion hands down the best airport in the world,

May want to revisit this statement if you ever get a chance to fly into SIN or AMS.

Quoting jcwr56 (Reply 5):
With Chicago's goal to be a top 5 destination city for international travelers within the U.S by 2020 (currently 9th).

Isn't CHI 5th for International O+D behind NYC, MIA/FLL, LA Basin and Bay Area?


User currently offlineORD2010 From United States of America, joined Sep 2013, 105 posts, RR: 0
Reply 11, posted (1 year 2 months 6 days 11 hours ago) and read 21980 times:

Quoting adamh8297 (Reply 10):

Quoting ORD2010 (Thread starter):
ORD is in my opinion hands down the best airport in the world,

May want to revisit this statement if you ever get a chance to fly into SIN or AMS.

Quoting jcwr56 (Reply 5):
With Chicago's goal to be a top 5 destination city for international travelers within the U.S by 2020 (currently 9th).

Isn't CHI 5th for International O+D behind NYC, MIA/FLL, LA Basin and Bay Area?

Having flown into many international airports around the globe, to me ORD remains #1 for its hubs, carriers, markets served, history, and design (not very efficient, but I do enjoy its architecture in a historical and beautiful way.) IF we look at airport design and such on its own DUS is my favorite. Traffic wise ORD is the 4th largest international gateway behind NYC, LAX, MIA. but they mean to get it to number 5 in total tourism count, so making it the 5th most visited city in the US, not just stopped by. in those Terms by pax traffic i believe it's #2 behind ATL.


User currently offlineAcey559 From United States of America, joined Jan 2007, 1542 posts, RR: 2
Reply 12, posted (1 year 2 months 6 days 11 hours ago) and read 21972 times:

Not service related but we just received an email stating 10C/28C will officially be open for business on October 17th. 10,801x200ft.

User currently offlinejayunited From United States of America, joined Jan 2013, 1018 posts, RR: 2
Reply 13, posted (1 year 2 months 6 days 11 hours ago) and read 21941 times:

Quoting ORD2010 (Reply 2):
It is set to be 380 ready soon with the new taxi ways and runways, but with LH planning the 748i for its ORD route will the 380 ever jump in? I believe BA downgraded one of its dailies to a 772 instead of twice daily 744's. Do you think EY would ever bring it to ORD? Sorry if this has been covered, but I wanted to add it into there.

Correct soon with the new taxi ways and runways the airfield will be ready for the A380 but I wonder is T5 ready for the A380? There is not a single gate at T5 equipped with double jet bridges, and with the A380's wing span T5 would be forced to close an adjacent gate or close one of the entrance/exit ramps to/from the bag room if they parked the plane at M7, M12, M13 due to the wing span. So although the airfield will be ready to handle the A380 the international terminal is not ready at this time. Hopefully we will see that change in the coming years.

Quoting ORD2010 (Thread starter):
The runways are coming in well and the south tower began construction, they are gearing up to make this the most efficient and important hub in the US with pax numbers up and international tourism in Chicago as a whole up. My outlook is:

I would agree with you but the storms we have had over the past week or so has shown that ORD is still not where we should be especially when it comes to T5. Just this past week we had A330's/ and 772ER and 77W sitting in penalty boxes for 45 minutes waiting for a gate at the international terminal due to late morning and early afternoon storms that delayed international arrivals and departures. So by the time the 230pm - 4pm arrivals landed there were very few 777/747/A330 gates available at T5 and this problem occurs every time we get late morning or early afternoon storms. By the time those mid afternoon flights start arriving even if the storms have cleared out T5 is in shambles with flights forced to wait up to 45 minutes for a gate sometimes longer. So there is still much work that must be done before ORD becomes efficient and if nothing is done to T5 the problem will only get worse when AA and UA start the retirement of their 763 fleets. Although T5 has 21 gates during the afternoon only 19 of those gates can be used M6 and M14 are not used due to clearance issues, also if you take away M18 (because it is a narrow body gate only) you have 18 useable gates. The next problem is M1, M2, M20,M21 can accommodate planes up to the 767 anything larger and it can not be parked at those 4 gates. This leaves only 14 gate available for the larger aircraft. I know there has been talk about expanding and reconfiguring T5 well the city needs to get on it because in its current state T5 is not ready for the future.

Quoting ORD2010 (Thread starter):
JJ launches daily GRU (most likely) or GIG 773 with a JV with AA now that they will be OW soon.

What would be the purpose of this flight with AA launching ORD-GRU soon? ORD-GRU is not a huge O&D market while UA does see quite a bit of O&D traffic most of the traffic on this route is connecting traffic from the West Coast or Asia. I don't think the market can support 3 flights a day between ORD and GRU. And there most certainly is not a viable market for daily service between ORD and GIG on a 773.

And as far as Russia goes AA tried nonstop service to Moscow a few years ago and it didn't work out so I don't see nonstop flights to Russia coming back either on an US carrier or a Russian carrier but I could be wrong about Russia.


User currently offlineORD2010 From United States of America, joined Sep 2013, 105 posts, RR: 0
Reply 14, posted (1 year 2 months 6 days 11 hours ago) and read 21888 times:

Quoting jayunited (Reply 14):
What would be the purpose of this flight with AA launching ORD-GRU soon? ORD-GRU is not a huge O&D market while UA does see quite a bit of O&D traffic most of the traffic on this route is connecting traffic from the West Coast or Asia. I don't think the market can support 3 flights a day between ORD and GRU. And there most certainly is not a viable market for daily service between ORD and GIG on a 773.

And as far as Russia goes AA tried nonstop service to Moscow a few years ago and it didn't work out so I don't see nonstop flights to Russia coming back either on an US carrier or a Russian carrier but I could be wrong about Russia.

I think at this point, using land surrounding the T5 area to build a new maybe remote concourse with at least 6 gates, 2 of them 380 capable, and expanding the immigration/customs area would be key. If not maybe a new terminal as a whole, what ever they do it cannot interfere with the current T5 operations, with AA removing all of its 757's to be replaced by 767's at ORD, UA bringing back the 744's and I'm sure soon many 787's space is going to be tight!

AA was denied rights to operate ORD-GRU when it applied, so I meant JJ would operate it in place of AA, which might ease permits and benefit both carriers in a JV being OW hub on both sides. GIG could maybe work with UA on a 767. I think soon we could see BOG (Colombian officials visited the airport to talk about business last week) maybe LIM.

As for Russia, I do believe the market didn't work then, but maybe now we could see it make a come back with a higher Russian population, ideal would be a 787 5x's weekly I'd say to Moscow.

How about Singapore? could a 788/9 fly this route? more importantly could it make it work?


User currently offlinejcwr56 From United States of America, joined Jul 2012, 539 posts, RR: 1
Reply 15, posted (1 year 2 months 6 days 10 hours ago) and read 21750 times:

Jay,

M1, 2, 3, 20 and 21 can handle up to an M11. M1 and 2 can be used as a 2 for 1 (it's not marked but the plans are there) 330, 340 or 772, yes it can fit. It's already being addressed with UA and AA about the 767 replacements.

I think the biggest issue with storms isn't as much as diversions for international flights, as it's the closure of the ramps when the passive lightning systems kick on. Everyone gets pulled off and we still have those long haul flights arriving.
Not much anyone can do.

Another issue is getting the planes off within the alloted time. For August, the average gate pull delay was 20 minutes. So far for September it's running 26 minutes. Those minutes add up when you have flights holding. Theres options being started as a short term fix while a longer term view is being pursued.

T5 is getting a lot of attention and there's more work being planned both with upgrades and facilities to address some of the points you've brought up.

Just was posted on the Tribunes site.

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/l...for-ohare-20130920,0,1667451.story






.

[Edited 2013-09-20 11:19:54]

User currently offlineORD2010 From United States of America, joined Sep 2013, 105 posts, RR: 0
Reply 16, posted (1 year 2 months 6 days 10 hours ago) and read 21717 times:

Quoting jcwr56 (Reply 16):
T5 is getting a lot of attention and there's more work being planned both with upgrades and facilities to address some of the points you've brought up.

what are these plans, if you know, that they are going to be addressing, It's about time we see some work at T5 when i was at T3 some months ago watching 5 there was a lot of movement and foreign tails there, and some on the remote stands, I think a major re-haul of many of the gates to add more spacing to allow larger planes is what should be done, leave a small amount of gates on the side for the mexico, central america, caribbean narrow body internationals. I think just 3 gates right now would be a huge help for all of this. Now isn't the master plan of 6 parallels really to prevent all these issues with weather related delays and issues? I'm honestly surprised how long the ORD airport staff has taken so long to get plans for an a380 gate knowing some carriers want to operate it there, and it is crucial for future growth, as much as I prefer the 747 over the 380, they must prepare.


User currently offlineLAXdude1023 From India, joined Sep 2006, 7758 posts, RR: 25
Reply 17, posted (1 year 2 months 6 days 10 hours ago) and read 21670 times:

Quoting adamh8297 (Reply 10):
Isn't CHI 5th for International O+D behind NYC, MIA/FLL, LA Basin and Bay Area?

That is correct.

I have to wonder how the slowing of international immigration into Chicago is going to affect its O&D numbers. Chicago is way down from 10 years ago in number of international immigrants per year. It will be up to the globalization of Chicago's economy to keep it going.



Stewed...Lewd...Crude...Irreverent...Belligerent
User currently offlineUnited787 From United States of America, joined May 2005, 2745 posts, RR: 2
Reply 18, posted (1 year 2 months 6 days 9 hours ago) and read 21613 times:

What ORD needs for more international traffic is for Star Alliance/UA and One World/AA to have international arrivals and departures happen at a new T2 for easier connections. T5 can remain SkyTeam and non-aligned international flights and then a new terminal for SkyTeam and non-aligned domestic flights. Or something like this - it needs more gates and that will only come with a new terminal...

Agreed...and no one has a solution for it...  Not to sound cold but the problem on an international level is really a PR problem more than anything else...but I am sure people choose not to come Chicago because of the perception. But the reality is that the high crime areas are fairly concentrated in the south and west neighborhoods of the City, areas that business travelers and tourists will never see. I live in the City (near north side), and although I find the situation sad and hopeless, it is something most Chicagoans don't experience first hand.

[Edited 2013-09-21 09:16:21 by SA7700]

User currently offlineORD2010 From United States of America, joined Sep 2013, 105 posts, RR: 0
Reply 19, posted (1 year 2 months 6 days 9 hours ago) and read 21594 times:

Quoting LAXdude1023 (Reply 19):
That is correct.

I have to wonder how the slowing of international immigration into Chicago is going to affect its O&D numbers. Chicago is way down from 10 years ago in number of international immigrants per year. It will be up to the globalization of Chicago's economy to keep it going.

It is however on the rise. International numbers are rising briskly and it is visible with the amount of new international carriers and new routes by already serving carriers at the airport. Like I said there is a rising amount of foreign tourist coming to the are. Reading a time magazine article, the midwest saw the largest job growth in the recent years due to hard industry. And compared to the days AA was cutting international flights left and right now they're adding along with UA. ORD is on a comeback.


User currently offlineVTORD From United States of America, joined Dec 2012, 120 posts, RR: 0
Reply 20, posted (1 year 2 months 6 days 9 hours ago) and read 21504 times:

Quoting ORD2010 (Thread starter):
9W launches daily connections to India via AUH (already rumored) with a 773

So far I have read only one article from India reporting that 9W is planning BLR-AUH-ORD (scissor hub moving to AUH from BRU). Very likely a change from EY metal to 9W metal or EY might use 9W as a feeder to their current flight from BLR. I don't see a market for both at the same time..........with QR, RJ and AI in the mix.



Get your facts first. Then you may distort them as you like.
User currently offlineORD2010 From United States of America, joined Sep 2013, 105 posts, RR: 0
Reply 21, posted (1 year 2 months 6 days 8 hours ago) and read 21571 times:

Quoting VTORD (Reply 26):
So far I have read only one article from India reporting that 9W is planning BLR-AUH-ORD (scissor hub moving to AUH from BRU). Very likely a change from EY metal to 9W metal or EY might use 9W as a feeder to their current flight from BLR. I don't see a market for both at the same time..........with QR, RJ and AI in the mix.

I think the 9W connection would fly into ORD with their equipment and EY continuing their daily 773 the market is there, TK wants to go twice daily, I think they are both trying to keep EK out on purpose.


User currently offlineCcrlR From United States of America, joined Aug 2001, 2240 posts, RR: 0
Reply 22, posted (1 year 2 months 6 days 8 hours ago) and read 21445 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting finnishway (Reply 1):
A380 & ORD has been discussed before. A few years ago ORD wasn't "A380 ready" and I don't know if it still is. It has also been discussed that BA or LH would be most likely carriers to operate the superjumbo to ORD.
Quoting jcwr56 (Reply 5):
Alot of what you've written has already been touched upon and it will still be some time before we see the A380 into ORD. It's now strictly a facilities issue after 10/28C opens up next month. LH will start their 748i on LH430 eff. 27OCT.

The 747-8 is the largest aircraft besides the 773 that ORD can handle. That one day a few years ago when Airbus brought in the A380 for LH, there were problems with maneuverability and parking the aircraft. It needs to have its own route from the runway to the terminal and vice-versa. It's a maneuverability issue for widebodies, they have guidelines now in place for large aircraft taxiing near the terminals. After the Eva Air 744 MQ EMB-140 collision last May they don't want that happening again. Even vehicles that drive on the service roads near taxiways have to be careful in certain areas

That will not keep tourists from comming here. Every city has this issue but that does not keep tourists from visiting Chicago.

[Edited 2013-09-21 09:15:44 by SA7700]


"He was right, it is a screaming metal deathtrap!"-Cosmo (from the Fairly Oddparents)
User currently offlineORDTLV2414 From United States of America, joined Mar 2013, 325 posts, RR: 0
Reply 23, posted (1 year 2 months 6 days 7 hours ago) and read 21363 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Chicago has a crime problem like any other city. I think next for ORD is south America and TLV. We need International arrivals at T3 or T1 in order relieve congestion at T5.

User currently offlineluckyone From United States of America, joined Aug 2008, 2208 posts, RR: 0
Reply 24, posted (1 year 2 months 6 days 6 hours ago) and read 21311 times:

Quoting ORDTLV2414 (Reply 32):
We need International arrivals at T3 or T1 in order relieve congestion at T5.

True story. And it was needed yesterday.


User currently offlineLAXdude1023 From India, joined Sep 2006, 7758 posts, RR: 25
Reply 25, posted (1 year 2 months 6 days 6 hours ago) and read 21561 times:

Quoting ORDTLV2414 (Reply 32):
I think next for ORD is south America and TLV.

TLV perhaps. Im not sold on more ORD-South America expansion.

ORD-South America has one large O&D market, GRU. Everything else is much smaller.

If were talking the next international carrier to ORD, I would vote for BR.



Stewed...Lewd...Crude...Irreverent...Belligerent
User currently offlineFWAERJ From United States of America, joined Jun 2006, 3811 posts, RR: 2
Reply 26, posted (1 year 2 months 6 days 6 hours ago) and read 21429 times:

Quoting LAXdude1023 (Reply 29):
If were talking the next international carrier to ORD, I would vote for BR.

BR before EK? I don't believe it. EK has been talking about ORD for over a decade (seriously), and hinted at ORD as one of the next three US destinations along with BOS (announced) and MIA recently.

Quoting luckyone (Reply 28):
Quoting ORDTLV2414 (Reply 32):
We need International arrivals at T3 or T1 in order relieve congestion at T5.

True story. And it was needed yesterday.

  

In an ideal world, I see a big Star Alliance consolidated west terminal with an FIS, T5 becoming a oneworld international terminal with a post-security tram or DEN/LGW-style walkway from T3 to T5, T2 being the new Eagle terminal with a major renovation, and T1 being converted into a SkyTeam, LCC, and nonaligned carrier terminal with a FIS on B.

All ORD gate leases expire in 2017 - there is hope.



"Did he really need the triple bypass? Or was it the miles?"
User currently offlineORD2010 From United States of America, joined Sep 2013, 105 posts, RR: 0
Reply 27, posted (1 year 2 months 6 days 4 hours ago) and read 21508 times:

Quoting FWAERJ (Reply 30):
BR before EK? I don't believe it. EK has been talking about ORD for over a decade (seriously), and hinted at ORD as one of the next three US destinations along with BOS (announced) and MIA recently.

Well EK has been hinting so long yet hasn't bit the bullet so I expect another year before we see a more solid rumor on their part, if there is one thing in the aviation industry that baffles me is why EK never got into ORD earlier and why they're waiting so long now. I definitely see EL returning next year, 9W starting along with EY, BR announcing, PIA trying to make a come back, more minor EU cities from AA and UA, maybe OSL with norwegian air shuttle on a 788 3xs weekly. Anyone know why TAP has never done ORD-LIS seasonally on a 330? I could see TK begin that second daily in further efforts to push out EK. maybe new opportunities from AI, ET with the 788? And lastly, EK announcing they definitely want to serve ORD, just not yet...

T5 can be expanded to its right which would reduce the cost and hassle of connecting a whole new terminal complex to the existing one, which would be able to meet all future growth, once the new terminal can begin opening in stages, I'd close select gates at the current one to convert for wider aircrafts and in one of the now two add 3 double gateways. then to handle the domestic growth expand 3 into that parcel of land in between the taxi way and airport access road. Thats a good fix for now to build upon the current layout and terminal complex without having to venture out into a whole new area with different access roads. I would also put a CTA transportation stop under the new international terminal much how LHR has a tube stop at T5 and T3. Now as to the moving of carriers at terminals, I don't know if the US carriers would want to bring all their affiliates to their buildings, although I don't see why not. Here is a horrendous drawing of what it'd be like:

ORD


User currently offlinejayunited From United States of America, joined Jan 2013, 1018 posts, RR: 2
Reply 28, posted (1 year 2 months 6 days 3 hours ago) and read 21383 times:

Quoting jcwr56 (Reply 16):
M1, 2, 3, 20 and 21 can handle up to an M11. M1 and 2 can be used as a 2 for 1 (it's not marked but the plans are there) 330, 340 or 772, yes it can fit. It's already being addressed with UA and AA about the 767 replacements.

If you want to split hairs we can I know M1,2, 20 and 21 can accommodate a MD11 I've seen MD11's parked at those gates, but when was the last time a MD11 passenger flight arrived at T5? This is why I said the largest aircraft those gates can handle is a 767.

And although plans have been in the works to update and expand T5 when will those plans be implemented? What we are seeing and experiencing right now at T5 is real problems even on clear sunny days T5 barely scrapes by with out a hiccup now throw in a storm and things go quickly down hill. Passengers should not be forced to wait on international arriving aircraft for 45 minutes or more because the terminal is not equipped to handle multiple A330's and 777 at a time. There have been days when M1,2 20 and 21 are empty and planes are forced to wait 45 minutes for a gate because they are to large to fit into any one of those four gates. I have heard about the plane to renovate and expand T5 my question is when will the city get down to business and make it happen the clock is ticking on the 763's.

Quoting ORDTLV2414 (Reply 27):
Chicago has a crime problem like any other city. I think next for ORD is south America and TLV. We need International arrivals at T3 or T1 in order relieve congestion at T5.

I agree with your statement but where would the international arrivals area be located? At both terminal 1 and 3 the baggage room is located underground and at least at T1 the bag room is pretty massive, and right underneath the passenger areas at T1 is the baggage input belts so the international arrivals area for T1 can not be located directly under neither the passenger area either. Could they place the facility underneath the bag room other wise known as the sorter?

I know UA would like to have their own international arrivals area at T1 it would cut UA's ORD taxi fuel cost a lot but where would the facility be locate that remains the question and the problem that both UA and AA are faced with? If we remove both UA and AA operations completely from T5 that would open up a lot of gates for international airlines to use.


User currently offlinenomorerjs From United States of America, joined Sep 2004, 524 posts, RR: 0
Reply 29, posted (1 year 2 months 6 days 3 hours ago) and read 21380 times:

Someday BR, EK, and LY as new airlines. UA (express) will probably continue to add underserved cities in the US and Canada. Will be curious to see what AA does.

Eventually a 380 on BA, LH, EK, or KE. BA is going back to a 744 and 777 this winter, but this is a frequency route which throws a wrench into the equation.


User currently offlineLFutia From Netherlands, joined Dec 2002, 3352 posts, RR: 31
Reply 30, posted (1 year 2 months 6 days 1 hour ago) and read 21231 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

I'd love to see KLM go daily double or atleast 2x a day on certain days of the week! DL is a big player here in Chicago and it wouldn't surprise me to see if we can handle more DL/KL connections.

ORD is a craphole when it comes to connecting especially INTL/DOM not one the best airports in the world! I live in the north suburbs and I honestly think ORD needs to be demolished and rebuilt. The signage is horrible and everything about it screams demolish me.

Leo/ORD



Leo/ORD -- Groetjes uit de VS! -- Heeft u laatst nog met KLM gevlogen?
User currently offlineORD2010 From United States of America, joined Sep 2013, 105 posts, RR: 0
Reply 31, posted (1 year 2 months 5 days 23 hours ago) and read 20954 times:

Quoting LFutia (Reply 34):

I'd love to see KLM go daily double or atleast 2x a day on certain days of the week! SA)">DL is a big player here in Chicago and it wouldn't surprise me to see if we can handle more SA)">DL/KL connections.

ORD is a craphole when it comes to connecting especially INTL/DOM not one the best airports in the world! I live in the north suburbs and I honestly think ORD needs to be demolished and rebuilt. The signage is horrible and everything about it screams demolish me.

Leo/ORD

I think now that T5 is finishing up its major remodel, ORD will focus on all the other terminal buildings, like I said they broke ground on a new consolidated parking and car rental center which will be connected to the terminals via the tram. I think connecting T5 to the other terminals beside the skytrain is key, maybe a very tall hall like in DEN? But ORD is old and does need a lot of love which it is getting slowly. Living in South Florida i travel through MIA a lot and let me tell you that is horrible, old mildew carpets, dark concourses with no food and bathrooms that are repulsive, ORD is a huge step up from this drab! But I think the next part of the modernization project is to tackle the terminals, I see ORD succeeding in the future with terminals just for ORD, I recall it isn't very considering the destinations served, but many skyteam carriers fly ORD successfully on simple O&D and no feed (KE, KL, AM) and some do need some help (AZ, AF). Do you know why AF could suddenly no longer fill anything more than a 330? I remember ORD used to be a 744 destination for them then 777 then 340 now 330 and DL 767 in winter (How is DL staffing this flight and doing?) I think if DL added a single international flight out of ORD it would rock the boat so hard AA and UA would really wake up and see the gold mine they have here! I think in time KL will go 2x daily 777, but in the near future I see daily 777 after the 744 retires since they operate 744 combi's that carry around the same load of pax as a 772. I could see ORD becoming an sky team focus city type like it is now. I think ORD is the only true full on bi-hub airport in the country, and adding some DL would be interesting. Alas I doubt that will happen since DL seems to be in a period of time where they are just flying and taking in money, no expansions or anything.

[Edited 2013-09-20 22:14:58]

[Edited 2013-09-20 22:16:05]

[Edited 2013-09-20 22:17:38]

User currently offlineSurfandsnow From United States of America, joined Jan 2009, 2897 posts, RR: 31
Reply 32, posted (1 year 2 months 5 days 20 hours ago) and read 20412 times:

Quoting ORD2010 (Thread starter):
ORD is in my opinion hands down the best airport in the world

WHAT?!!!?!??! You must be joking??

Quoting ORD2010 (Thread starter):
It has had a fantastic 2012 with new carriers and returning ones: Austrian, Airberlin, Qatar, Hainan and new routes from Shannon to Dusseldorf to name a few from its two home carriers, as well as newly announced Edinburgh from 2014 by UA.

Now this I agree with. However, keep in mind that other major U.S. airports like BOS, LAS, MIA, and SEA have also been doing extremely well in terms of getting new service from various domestic and foreign carriers during this same timeframe.

Quoting ORD2010 (Thread starter):
what is next? Has ORD reached its peak destination wise?

Absolutely not. Whenever it seems there is nowhere else to go from ORD, the airlines surprise it with anything from tiny regional markets (ART, CHO, CMX, MHK, PAH, YKF, etc.) to interesting stuff much further afield (FAI, GUA, HEL, etc.). I certainly wouldn't be surprised to see anything start from BGR or MOT to BOG or OSL.

Quoting ORD2010 (Thread starter):
I know EK has been beating around the ORD bush for years now (even filing to begin W13 service and then withdrawing). Will they ever finally decide to come? They complain about competition, but does it really have that much at ORD with the name EK carries?

EK will happen sooner or later. ORD, along with MIA and the recently announced BOS, is an integral part of their U.S. expansion strategy. Chicago is now one of the most iconic cities in the world missing from the EK route map, and I daresay Dubai may well be one of the most popular markets unserved nonstop from ORD today. Competition will be intense, especially because most Chicago travelers that fly internationally are extremely loyal to UA/Star Alliance or AA/oneworld, but EK should have no trouble getting the travelers that would take independent subcontinent carriers like AI and PK.

Quoting ORD2010 (Thread starter):
Look at QR, their ORD service wasn't meant to be daily and on a 787, and not too far in they kept the 773 and went daily.

Don't forget that QR announced ORD before announcing their decision to join oneworld. With oneworld membership came access to AA's ORD hub feed and local FFer base, providing a significant boost to the service!

Quoting ORD2010 (Thread starter):
Hainan is going Daily next year (more than they originally had planned the route with, 4x's weekly) and that was announced days after its first flight!

Yes, but it appears that hinges on getting Chinese government approval to operate the 787 on the route (much easier to go daily with the 215 seat 787 than the 288 seat A346). Also, HU would never be a competitive option against the daily AA and UA services, so they have little choice but to do so in order to be attractive and successful.

Quoting ORD2010 (Thread starter):
will we see the Star Alliance carriers of Asia jump in there, rumor is BR is looking into it. With a second 773 from ANA coming in daily and OZ going daily for a time this summer (I suspect equipment shortage due to SFO isn't allowing the daily to stick around). Where will the asian market come from next?

In terms of Asian Star Alliance carriers serving ORD:

BR is a possibility, but the U.S.-Taiwan market seems to be very limited beyond the big 3 U.S. Asian gateway markets (L.A., New York, and San Francisco). Even with Taiwanese citizens now enjoying hassle free access to the U.S. under the Visa Waiver Program, it doesn't seem like there has been a big explosion in demand. ORD-TPE would be an awfully long, thin route, and BR's TPE hub really doesn't offer Star Alliance pax anything that can't already be accessed one stop via ICN, NRT, or PEK. Perhaps BR could try a less than daily one stop service like TPE-NGO/KIX-ORD with UA codeshare, though.

CA clearly had no interest in ORD. Chinese authorities have a policy of giving CA first dibs on all international routes. CA could have gained exclusive Chinese rights to PEK-ORD, but they didn't bother and let HU start the route.

SQ already tried ORD and failed. Their lack of cooperation with UA would likely prove to be an insurmountable obstacle for any resumption of ORD service.

TG can't even figure out how to serve their sole U.S. gateway LAX, and didn't even try to keep New York after the nonstop A345 BKK-JFK service flopped. ORD probably isn't even on their radar.

As for new Asian carriers, the only one I see seriously considering ORD would be PR, and they are forbidden from adding any new U.S. services under Category 2 restrictions.

Quoting ORD2010 (Thread starter):
South America is a very underserved area from ORD, while more logical for airlines to fly these routes from southern hubs, do people from the midwest really want to connect in Texas or Florida?

South America underserved? Both UA and AA tried nonstops to EZE without success. UA actually tried ORD-EZE several times, and even tagged MVD onto the ORD flights, but to no avail. If EZE doesn't work from ORD, its safe to say anything other than GRU in deep South America requiring the use of a widebody (i.e. GIG, SCL) is absolutely out of the question. Even with GRU, AA only recently showed any interest in serving it nonstop from ORD. Given that AA is so strong in the GRU market, I'm guessing that's because they doubt the ORD-GRU market can support anything beyond the current/established UA service.

Markets within narrowbody range of ORD might be less risky, but any niche there has probably now been filled by the new CM service (offering great access to all major South American markets via PTY). ORD just doesn't have much demand to South America, and the lack of existing services reflect that. There just aren't that many South Americans living in Chicago or areas logically accessed via ORD. People in the Midwest don't go to South America much, and those that do can easily connect via ATL, DFW, IAH, MEX, MIA, PTY, or even YYZ.

Quoting ORD2010 (Thread starter):
Africa, with the 788 could we maybe see Royal Air Maroc and ET go for a couple of weekly flights into ORD.

Absolutely not. A few years ago South African announced an ORD service and loaded it for sale, only to cut it long before it ever began due to extremely poor advanced bookings. I just discussed the lack of demand for South America out of ORD, demand for African service from ORD is even worse.

Quoting ORD2010 (Thread starter):
Will we ever see OSL/LIS/BCN flights and the return of MXP?

Certainly a possibility. These seem like good candidates for any future AA or UA transatlantic services out of ORD.

Quoting ORD2010 (Thread starter):
T5 is set to be ready from its renovations soon this year, but T5 is jam packed, will a new international terminal be coming at last?

I have never found Terminal 5 to be jam packed, at least when compared to ORD's other terminals (which handle many of the international departures). I would think a Terminal 5 expansion or new domestic concourse (how about a Concourse A off of B?) would be more likely and sufficient than a wholly new terminal.

Quoting ORD2010 (Thread starter):
A new car rental and parking facility has been approved and began construction off site and will have connections via the airport tram.

Where is this going to be? ORD's current rental car setup seems pretty par for the course when it comes to a major airport. A short bus ride, no big deal. The parking situation also seems very standard, an extremely expensive garage within walking distance of the terminal and remote lots with regular bus service...

Quoting ORD2010 (Thread starter):
The runways are coming in well and the south tower began construction, they are gearing up to make this the most efficient and important hub in the US with pax numbers up and international tourism in Chicago as a whole up.

Most efficient? What about Chicago's awful weather? Surely a warm dry hub like LAX or PHX is much more efficient. Most important? What about ATL? WN may be cutting back at ATL, but DL is busy upgauging all kinds of routes, and foreign carriers seem to be taking a great interest in that market. I'm glad to hear that Chicago's international tourism is up, but the city has a nasty reputation for gang violence and until we stop reading the tragic headlines, many people are going to steer clear of it. Here in Florida, some people talk negatively about/avoid visiting Chicago because they think it has been a dangerous gang infested city from the days of Capone through to today...

Quoting ORD2010 (Thread starter):
9W launches daily connections to India via AUH (already rumored) with a 773

Is this in addition to the existing EY flights? Wouldn't it make more sense to offer a nonstop ORD-India service, or probably better yet a one-stop via Europe, rather than a second daily AUH flight? There is much greater demand for something like Amsterdam out of ORD than Abu Dhabi.

Quoting ORD2010 (Thread starter):
one of the Russian carriers returns, I think SU with a 773 4-5xs weekly (very large russian population here over 400k.)

ORD might be a good market for UN, which has high density aircraft that often run at less than daily frequencies. However, U.S.-Russia seems like a tricky market, since the U.S. and Russia impose such onerous visa restrictions on each other's citizens.

Quoting ORD2010 (Thread starter):
What do you guys think is next for ORD?

AA to BCN, various regional markets
AS to SAN
B6 to FLL
EK to DXB
FI to KEF
NK to ATL, BWI, MSY, OAK, PHL, SAN, TLC
UA to GDL, MXP, various regional markets
WS to YYZ



Flying in the middle seat of coach is much better than not flying at all!
User currently offline747-600X From United States of America, joined Jan 2000, 2795 posts, RR: 14
Reply 33, posted (1 year 2 months 5 days 17 hours ago) and read 20045 times:

What O'Hare needs is GATES. Since the invasion of the RJs, things have gotten ridiculous. Every day, planes - mostly RJs - pile up in the holding pads and Penalty Box. When it gets really bad, they start lining them up on the taxiways. Some days, United Express flights will experience double-dipper gate delays, where a jet will show up waiting for a gate that another plane ahead of it is already waiting for. Compared to its international competitors, the international terminal is just "plane" small. It doesn't have enough gates as is, and even after renovations the security checkpoint (the ONE security checkpoint) will still be a bottleneck.

My proposal? Build a new west field terminal with two distinct concourses - one for a solid 75+ regional jets, another for a good 25+ VLAs, all with 2 jetbridges and some with 3. Then, repurpose Terminal 2 (currently mostly RJ traffic) to its original use for mid-size aircraft (the dead-end taxi lanes between the terminals are lethal when it gets busy - those RJs just get tied in knots trying to get to and from their gates - the concourses were never designed or intended for that volume of traffic). Then also repurpose Terminal 5 for non-hub carriers. That way, Untied could aggregate all its flights together in T1 and 2, and American including USAir could spread from T3 over to the other side of T2, while carriers such as Alaska, Delta, Air Canada (which operates as a domestic for all intents and purposes) and Spirit could all have T5 to themselves.

Runways are nice, but the tower controllers at ORD get plenty of practice filling up the Penalty Box, the runway hold pads, and then taxiway N. If we're going to continue catering to swarms of RJs *and* hope to have VLAs taken seriously (two/three jet bridges) we just need to build a new terminal. The way things stand, we just don't have room for the planes.



"Mental health is reality at all cost." -- M. Scott Peck, 'The Road Less Traveled'
User currently offlinebrilondon From Canada, joined Aug 2005, 4389 posts, RR: 2
Reply 34, posted (1 year 2 months 5 days 14 hours ago) and read 19389 times:

Quoting ORD2010 (Reply 15):
I think at this point, using land surrounding the T5 area to build a new maybe remote concourse with at least 6 gates, 2 of them 380 capable, and expanding the immigration/customs area would be key. If not maybe a new terminal as a whole, what ever they do it cannot interfere with the current T5 operations, with AA removing all of its 757's to be replaced by 767's at ORD, UA bringing back the 744's and I'm sure soon many 787's space is going to be tight!

ORD is already a pain to use when flying in from an international city or arriving real early in the morning. Why would they not just make a couple of gates at the current terminal M for the A380. The rest is just making sure there is not enough room for all the passengers in the departure lounge and closing a couple more security lines when transferring to a domestic flight at terminals at C through F.



Rush for ever; Yankees all the way!!
User currently offlinejcwr56 From United States of America, joined Jul 2012, 539 posts, RR: 1
Reply 35, posted (1 year 2 months 5 days 14 hours ago) and read 19314 times:

Quoting 747-600X (Reply 39):



Yes, and what I see here are folks who are looking at it from their respective airlines position. United NEEDS their own FIS, American NEEDS their own FIS. Yet, neither wants to financially support funding a new western terminal to actually move their competitors to it. We're talking over a billion dollars for that terminal and several years to complete once the approvals are finally given.

Delta is in the perfect position, they have the terminal both UA and AA and some of the lowest lease rates. Why in gods name would they desire to move and increase their cost? DL doesn't have any plans to grow much more at ORD.

One of the key factors being looked currently is efficiencies by the carriers that arrival only at T5. It's widely known that T5 is used as a place to hold aircraft until the domestic gates are available. People complain of gate holds and yet, the biggest offenders are the ones who leave from the domestic side.

Any new carrier or current carrier wants to add a flight into T5, just schedule it around 1200-1300 or after 1700. There's plenty of gates available during that time as everyone is focused between 1400-1600.


User currently offlineCcrlR From United States of America, joined Aug 2001, 2240 posts, RR: 0
Reply 36, posted (1 year 2 months 5 days 14 hours ago) and read 19249 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting jcwr56 (Reply 41):
One of the key factors being looked currently is efficiencies by the carriers that arrival only at T5. It's widely known that T5 is used as a place to hold aircraft until the domestic gates are available. People complain of gate holds and yet, the biggest offenders are the ones who leave from the domestic side.

Spirit and Virgin America use Terminal 5 for gate space due to the L concourse being full sometimes. AA uses one for 767's(with one other gate for 737, MD-80) and for Qatar and Air Berlin departures while American Connection use the other gates besides Westjet, JetBlue, Air Choice One, Spirit, and Virgin America.



"He was right, it is a screaming metal deathtrap!"-Cosmo (from the Fairly Oddparents)
User currently offlineapodino From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 4304 posts, RR: 6
Reply 37, posted (1 year 2 months 5 days 13 hours ago) and read 19093 times:

Quoting Surfandsnow (Reply 38):
Quoting ORD2010 (Thread starter):
The runways are coming in well and the south tower began construction, they are gearing up to make this the most efficient and important hub in the US with pax numbers up and international tourism in Chicago as a whole up.

Most efficient? What about Chicago's awful weather? Surely a warm dry hub like LAX or PHX is much more efficient.

He is exactly right. When all the construction is done, ORD will have the capability to run Quad Approaches simultaneously, which even in bad weather would mean you would have an arrival rate of well over 120 planes per hour. The only other airports like that in the US are DFW and DEN, and those airports deal with their own weather issues from time to time.

I agree....the issue in ORD is partially gates but also there are just too many RJ's. United has RJed that airport so much that even half their mainline concourse is Express practically, with the banana peel on B and the low C gates. By my count, I think they barely have 38 mainline gates now (Since the banana peel is now used for 170's and C1-C8 have been express for a while). If you want to compare other hubs, AA at DFW has close to 80 gates and maybe even more that handle mainline planes. DL in ATL has well over 100, and DTW on the A gates has about 50 or so. I get that some of these are tough to compare because EMB 170's are using mainline gates now as well, but considering ORD is UA's HQ and biggest hub, their reliance on RJ's in that hub still baffles me.


User currently offlineORD2010 From United States of America, joined Sep 2013, 105 posts, RR: 0
Reply 38, posted (1 year 2 months 5 days 13 hours ago) and read 19069 times:

Quoting Surfandsnow (Reply 38):
Quoting ORD2010 (Thread starter):
ORD is in my opinion hands down the best airport in the world

WHAT?!!!?!??! You must be joking??

Quoting ORD2010 (Thread starter):
It has had a fantastic 2012 with new carriers and returning ones: Austrian, Airberlin, Qatar, Hainan and new routes from Shannon to Dusseldorf to name a few from its two home carriers, as well as newly announced Edinburgh from 2014 by UA.

Now this I agree with. However, keep in mind that other major U.S. airports like BOS, LAS, MIA, and SEA have also been doing extremely well in terms of getting new service from various domestic and foreign carriers during this same timeframe.

Quoting ORD2010 (Thread starter):
what is next? Has ORD reached its peak destination wise?

Absolutely not. Whenever it seems there is nowhere else to go from ORD, the airlines surprise it with anything from tiny regional markets (ART, CHO, CMX, MHK, PAH, YKF, etc.) to interesting stuff much further afield (FAI, GUA, HEL, etc.). I certainly wouldn't be surprised to see anything start from BGR or MOT to BOG or OSL.

Haha, In my opinion I love ORD, to me it represents air travel more than any other airport, but that is my personal opinion aside its delays and mess. SEA is having a fantastic year, but ORD's year has been international heavy and they're all doing very well which is even better to show ORD can handle all those carriers!.
I think Oslo will be the next EU city to come from ORD, i see it either on a SAS 330, norwegian 788, or UA 757 (I think the 757 is a good size for this). BOG definitely next year as colombian officials already began meeting with the ORD delegation. For me Edinburgh from UA was a curve ball, didn't see it coming, but I've heard they've had amazing success on the Shannon flight (maybe we'll see 3xs weekly seasonal service to Cork at some point?) I think when LX receives its 773's we would see them at ORD since after JFK its their second busiest US route. HEL I think s a great route, does great for AA on its daily summer 767. Do you think we could see maybe Finnair come in and do the route during the summer on their metal and AA do it winter and make it year round? (DL/AF type deal on CDG). It would be awesome to see the finn tail at T5.

Quoting Surfandsnow (Reply 38):
EK will happen sooner or later. ORD, along with MIA and the recently announced BOS, is an integral part of their U.S. expansion strategy. Chicago is now one of the most iconic cities in the world missing from the EK route map, and I daresay Dubai may well be one of the most popular markets unserved nonstop from ORD today. Competition will be intense, especially because most Chicago travelers that fly internationally are extremely loyal to UA/Star Alliance or AA/oneworld, but EK should have no trouble getting the travelers that would take independent subcontinent carriers like AI and PK.

Agree, but EK doesn't seem to think so with how long they've been taking to finally fly here.

Quoting Surfandsnow (Reply 38):
In terms of Asian Star Alliance carriers serving ORD:

BR is a possibility, but the U.S.-Taiwan market seems to be very limited beyond the big 3 U.S. Asian gateway markets (L.A., New York, and San Francisco). Even with Taiwanese citizens now enjoying hassle free access to the U.S. under the Visa Waiver Program, it doesn't seem like there has been a big explosion in demand. ORD-TPE would be an awfully long, thin route, and BR's TPE hub really doesn't offer Star Alliance pax anything that can't already be accessed one stop via ICN, NRT, or PEK. Perhaps BR could try a less than daily one stop service like TPE-NGO/KIX-ORD with UA codeshare, though.

I could see BR doing a tag on but from TPE, like ORD-TPE-KIX and return. I think KIX is on the radar for ORD as a re-launch, maybe a 788 on UA would be the right equipment. How come CA didn't decide to go to ORD? I feel like they would do better than HU on a 330 or eventual 789. But it seems like HU on their 788 will do fantastic.

Quoting Surfandsnow (Reply 38):
South America underserved?

Well maybe not deep south america, but I could see Colombia coming, maybe Lima, and down the road with a proper JV with AA to launch SCL to feed both sides of flight could work on a 767 or 787. I think 767 would be ideal seating wise. I think we will see BOG, LIM on 73's or 320's as the nearest routes down the road and later on GIG and SCL and maybe another attempt at EZE on a smaller 788 on UA.

Quoting Surfandsnow (Reply 38):
Absolutely not. A few years ago South African announced an ORD service and loaded it for sale, only to cut it long before it ever began due to extremely poor advanced bookings. I just discussed the lack of demand for South America out of ORD, demand for African service from ORD is even worse.

Maybe we could see egyptair 2x's weekly or ET 2x's weekly eventually being star carriers with feed on both sides, I think ET is more likely if it happens, they seem to have a better relationship with UA to provide feed from both sides.

Quoting Surfandsnow (Reply 38):
Quoting ORD2010 (Thread starter):
Will we ever see OSL/LIS/BCN flights and the return of MXP?

Certainly a possibility. These seem like good candidates for any future AA or UA transatlantic services out of ORD.

I think those three are a star niche market, hub to hub on OSL and LIS, lets see when OSL comes which I think will be the first, with SAS or UA. Then LIS maybe on TAP with a 330 would be nice to see but I see it on UA happening as well on JV's on smaller planes. BCN sold very well when PIA did it and could succeed on AA metal to feed into OW hub to hub as IB is too weak to even consider BCN-ORD, or any routes for that matter.

Quoting Surfandsnow (Reply 38):
I have never found Terminal 5 to be jam packed, at least when compared to ORD's other terminals (which handle many of the international departures). I would think a Terminal 5 expansion or new domestic concourse (how about a Concourse A off of B?) would be more likely and sufficient than a wholly new terminal.

I think an expansion of the concourse to the right (see the picture I put on a previous post) and add multi bridge gates to handle 380's and 748i's as I see more coming. I could see an expansion of T3 to that area beside it (see pic above as well) to shove a lot of the RJ's

Quoting Surfandsnow (Reply 38):
Where is this going to be? ORD's current rental car setup seems pretty par for the course when it comes to a major airport. A short bus ride, no big deal. The parking situation also seems very standard, an extremely expensive garage within walking distance of the terminal and remote lots with regular bus service...

its gonna be off the main road by where the access road begins, http://www.bizjournals.com/chicago/n...o-get-new-rental-car.html?page=all gives you the break down. This is what it'll look like
ORD


Quoting Surfandsnow (Reply 38):
Most efficient?

The most efficient like facility wise with the 6 parallels and major taxi ways and 3 ATC towers and great green cargo facilities. But we can change the weather, if you factor that out then ORD could be amazing especially with an expansion here and there.

Quoting Surfandsnow (Reply 38):
Is this in addition to the existing EY flights?

No word on it yet, Nothing is concrete yet but that is what they're saying, and it is a new Indian city currently not served, but I don't think EY would simply give up their metal on the ORD route which has been doing great for them. I think we could see 9W metal occasionally, maybe not daily flying along side EY's, I think ORD could handle another AUH flight 5x's a week given the indian connection on the AUH side which is growing (AI serves 2 cities, Hyderabad few times a week and daily delhi, but hyderabad is a tag on the 773 begins there and ends in ORD). I always saw 9W coming to ORD with time, however I think had they kept their old BRU connection hub would of fared better given that the BRU market is better as UA upgraded from a 76 to a 772 this year. But AUH is the new transatlantic hub.

Quoting Surfandsnow (Reply 38):
ORD might be a good market for UN, which has high density aircraft that often run at less than daily frequencies. However, U.S.-Russia seems like a tricky market, since the U.S. and Russia impose such onerous visa restrictions on each other's citizens.

Agreed, having tried to go Russia before it is a tough market on their side to get in. Living in Miami though we get twice daily at times to Moscow on 2 carriers. I'm pretty sure we could handle a multi weekly or daily moscow flight from ORD, which has a much larger native population and traffic and connections than MIA, it was done before, why not again? Eastern EU is the next market for ORD as western EU is well covered, and OS and LO doing well, I could see Moscow, Kiev, and eventually Athens once things get better there, how ever I can't see Kiev or Athens working daily, maybe 3-5xs weekly (Huge amount of Ukraine immigrants in Chicago make up a good part of its Russian pop and they all constantly fly back as I've met many. Good Greek community in chicago as well although the economic situation I think is the element holding it back). I could see Glasgow 1x daily and Manchester going 2x daily with BA and the 787 complimenting AA's 767.

Quoting Surfandsnow (Reply 38):
AA to BCN, various regional markets
AS to SAN
B6 to FLL
EK to DXB
FI to KEF
NK to ATL, BWI, MSY, OAK, PHL, SAN, TLC
UA to GDL, MXP, various regional markets
WS to YYZ

Absolutely agree, i could see WS being the first followed by B6 as living by FLL I've noticed a lot of recent awareness of Chicago and a lot of people wanting to go. EK confuses me. FI, I've been waiting for them, they've launched small canadian markets, MSP, DEN, and to me ORD seems so much more logical to not have to rely solely on O&D and operate a major hub to hub flight. I could definitely see NK expanding, they are a serious in growing and people fly them as much as they hate them, which is a lot. I think MXP could work especially with EXPO2015 and the world route summit at Chicago in 2014 I could see it working for at least those two years for world events and maybe after that with proper awareness. GDL for me is a given since the only daily at ORD is the early morning and MDW is far. I still think JJ could launch ORD-GRU as their intro into OW with a JV with AA since AA was denied the rights especially heading into the world cup and olympics and AA GIG seasonal for a short term again for these big international events.


User currently offlinejsnww81 From United States of America, joined Jan 2002, 2051 posts, RR: 15
Reply 39, posted (1 year 2 months 5 days 13 hours ago) and read 19030 times:

I live in Chicago. As others have said, unless you live in certain neighborhoods on the south or west side, the crime rate doesn't even come close to being an issue. There's a small demographic in this city that refuses to play nicely with everyone else, but for those of us in the rest of the city, life is pretty good.

Quoting apodino (Reply 44):
When all the construction is done, ORD will have the capability to run Quad Approaches simultaneously, which even in bad weather would mean you would have an arrival rate of well over 120 planes per hour.

The four parallel approaches are wonderful in theory, but I don't have much faith in the FAA doing a thorough job redesigning our airspace to efficiently bring planes into the Chicago control area. When the first new runway opened in 2008, the flow-control delays went down significantly, but you still see flights being vectored all over the metro area to get lined up for landing. The volume of regional jet flights at ORD is so staggering these days (although lately mainline does seem to be up slightly) that it's madness just trying to get everyone lined up for the three parallel approaches we currently have.

[Edited 2013-09-21 09:26:10 by SA7700]

User currently offlinebrilondon From Canada, joined Aug 2005, 4389 posts, RR: 2
Reply 40, posted (1 year 2 months 5 days 12 hours ago) and read 18977 times:

Quoting ORD2010 (Thread starter):
ORD is in my opinion hands down the best airport in the world,

Ok, now that I have gotten up off the floor laughing, I can comment on this statement. Yes, it is your opinion but I think that it might just be a little short sighted. Which airports are you comparing it to? I can think of three or four just in the US that are a better experience to fly through, no wait, I can think of a lot more than three. Just the ones I use on a regular basis HNL, DTW, DFW, BUF, SEA and ATL all offer a better experience than ORD IMO.



Rush for ever; Yankees all the way!!
User currently online727LOVER From United States of America, joined Oct 2001, 6559 posts, RR: 20
Reply 41, posted (1 year 2 months 5 days 12 hours ago) and read 18937 times:

Quoting jcwr56 (Reply 5):
after 10/28C opens up next month

Is there an exact date for this?.......and when this happens, what runway(s) will close?



Listen Betty, don't start up with your 'White Zone' s*** again.
User currently offlineAmricanShamrok From Ireland, joined May 2008, 2977 posts, RR: 0
Reply 42, posted (1 year 2 months 5 days 12 hours ago) and read 19007 times:

Quoting jayunited (Reply 14):
M6 and M14 are not used due to clearance issues
Quoting apodino (Reply 44):
ORD is UA's HQ and biggest hub

While Chicago is UA's headquarters, IAH is its largest hub.

Quoting ORD2010 (Reply 45):
I think Oslo will be the next EU city to come from ORD, i see it either on a SAS 330, norwegian 788, or UA 757

I'm not sure a fully loaded 757 would not make it from ORD to OSL without a fuel stop en route (definitely not during the winter months anyway). This route would be 64nm longer than EWR-TXL which is currently the longest 757 service for UA, operating during the summer (I believe it's operated by a 767 during the winter).

Quoting ORD2010 (Reply 45):
I've heard they've had amazing success on the Shannon flight (maybe we'll see 3xs weekly seasonal service to Cork at some point?)

We will absolutely never see an ORD-ORK route. Cork currently has no longhaul service whatsoever and if they ever get any, it'll be at most 3x/4x weekly seasonal service to NYC. Just my two cents.

I do know that there are ongoing discussions between SNN and UA to expand the ORD-SNN schedule for next summer. I don't know if this means an increase in frequency or an extension to the June-September run or both.



Shannon-Chicago
User currently offlinejcwr56 From United States of America, joined Jul 2012, 539 posts, RR: 1
Reply 43, posted (1 year 2 months 5 days 12 hours ago) and read 18901 times:

Quoting 727LOVER (Reply 49):
Is there an exact date for this?.......and when this happens, what runway(s) will close?

October 17th and none.


User currently offlineORD2010 From United States of America, joined Sep 2013, 105 posts, RR: 0
Reply 44, posted (1 year 2 months 5 days 12 hours ago) and read 18893 times:

Quoting AmricanShamrok (Reply 50):
I'm not sure a fully loaded 757 would not make it from ORD to OSL without a fuel stop en route (definitely not during the winter months anyway). This route would be 64nm longer than EWR-TXL which is currently the longest 757 service for UA, operating during the summer (I believe it's operated by a 767 during the winter).

Agreed, but I feel like a 767 might just be too much capacity, maybe the efficiency of the 788 can make up for that, and I could be wrong maybe the traffic into OSL would be higher to fill a 767.

Quoting AmricanShamrok (Reply 50):
We will absolutely never see an ORD-ORK route. Cork currently has no longhaul service whatsoever and if they ever get any, it'll be at most 3x/4x weekly seasonal service to NYC. Just my two cents.

I do know that there are ongoing discussions between SNN and UA to expand the ORD-SNN schedule for next summer. I don't know if this means an increase in frequency or an extension to the June-September run or both.

I thought they already had service from new york to Cork, but in that case I see JFK first or EWR. As for Shannon I think we could see it expanded on both terms, funny how when Aer Lingus flew SNN it didn't work but with UA it's done great.

Quoting brilondon (Reply 48):
Ok, now that I have gotten up off the floor laughing, I can comment on this statement. Yes, it is your opinion but I think that it might just be a little short sighted. Which airports are you comparing it to? I can think of three or four just in the US that are a better experience to fly through, no wait, I can think of a lot more than three. Just the ones I use on a regular basis HNL, DTW, DFW, BUF, SEA and ATL all offer a better experience than ORD IMO.

As i said in my opinion, I've yet to have a bad experience at ORD and the terminals are clean and easy to navigate through that I've used, the city it serves is absolutely fantastic (just don't be an idiot and wander into the bad areas of the south/southwest then you're asking for it, same advice I give people coming into MIA which sees horrendous crime rates around our county area.) ATL I've had nothing but bad experiences and heavy delays even on night time flights when the airport is empty. You can't judge the weather in this since the airport is not in control of this. The carriers that serve ORD are top notch to some of the best destinations and the variety is fantastic. To me it is really the best far better than the mildew ridden dark and dirty airport we use in Miami. By usage alone and convenience, FLL is my favorite, close to home, no lines, fast to move in, clean and small. DUS is absolutely magnificent, absolutely nothing bad, BCN is nice, LHR is a mess, CDG is confusing and spread out, FCO is old and run down but great shopping. Don't get me started on South America.


User currently online727LOVER From United States of America, joined Oct 2001, 6559 posts, RR: 20
Reply 45, posted (1 year 2 months 5 days 12 hours ago) and read 18927 times:

Quoting jcwr56 (Reply 50):
October 17th and none.

WOW.....so they'll be using 8 runways??????

Now,...will 10L/28R (which I think is the former 10/28.....and before that, 9R/27L) still be the main runway for international heavies & cargo?



Listen Betty, don't start up with your 'White Zone' s*** again.
User currently offlineORDTLV2414 From United States of America, joined Mar 2013, 325 posts, RR: 0
Reply 46, posted (1 year 2 months 5 days 10 hours ago) and read 18780 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting LFutia (Reply 30):
DL is a big player here in Chicago and it wouldn't surprise me to see if we can handle more DL/KL connections.

hahaha. that is ludicrous. DL is such a small player here in Chicago. This is a UA/AA City.


User currently offlinethekennady From United States of America, joined Nov 2008, 394 posts, RR: 0
Reply 47, posted (1 year 2 months 5 days 9 hours ago) and read 18678 times:

Good post, I love these! Sorry im late to post
ORD has seen a good amount of additional service this year and lets hope it continues into next year as well.

Quoting ORD2010 (Thread starter):
ORD is in my opinion hands down the best airport in the world

I Understand how you feel about ORD, but I would not say its the best Airport in the world because many cities around the globe have airports with more modern terminals and facilities. But what maybe you mean is that ORD is one of the most Impressive airports in the world. That I can agree with, ORD has a amazing number of flights landing and departing that it can get pretty exciting at ORD. With 2 Legacy carriers with major hubs, a strong number of International carriers, and a good balance of domestic and International service, ORD is surely a amazing airport indeed. From a spotting standpoint the Regional jets can get tiring, but ORD is probably the Only airport in the world where you can see 12 regional jets in a row followed by two 777s. From a passenger standpoint, there are many carrier options as well as non stop destinations, and the airport is not a bad place to connect except for going from INTL to a domestic flight. The Airfield will continue to receive additions and improvements that will make it more efficient. Gate space is limited and the terminals are older which is the a real big knock on ORD as of right now. So a very impressive airport but I would not say the absolute best.

Quoting ORD2010 (Thread starter):
EK finally launches daily 773 service to DXB

Only a matter or time, will be with a 773, the timing slots may be a issue if EK wants a early afternoon arrival and a evening departure. Something arriving in the 1130-1pm time may work for them. EK though will face heavy competition, which will be great for ORD and the passengers but may oversaturate the market a bit. RJ, EK, QR, EY, TK, AI and the EU carriers will be fighting it out, will be fun to see how they all fair in the long run.

Quoting ORD2010 (Thread starter):
9W launches daily connections to India via AUH (already rumored) with a 773

Just now hearing about this, is there really room for 9W? they would have to go against AI and the carriers I mentioned before for connections to India, AI has been rumoring a possible 787 on ORD-BOM and this would really make it hard for 9W to catch on. Maybe 3 times weekly to complement the EY flight? we will see.

Quoting ORD2010 (Thread starter):
BR goes 5x weekly to TPE with a 777

one of the Russian carriers returns, I think SU with a 773 4-5xs weekly (very large russian population here over 400k.)

BR is the most likely East Asian carrier to come to ORD. Star to Star and would be a new gateway for BR to connect passengers from the East coast and Midwest to southeast Asia. BR would face a lot of competition as well but its worth a try.

I don't see any service to Russia anytime soon, flying to Russia would be a long flight with majority VFR traffic and would require a flyover of all the Major European hubs. Russia has poor Geography to fly to the states from with Europe being right there.

Quoting ORD2010 (Thread starter):
JJ launches daily GRU (most likely) or GIG 773 with a JV with AA now that they will be OW soon.

ET 2xs weekly to ADD 788.

No and No, If there is another ORD-GRU route it will be AA after the slots open again, and wont be with a 773, that's too much capacity. ET serves YYZ and that's as close as they will get.

Quoting ORD2010 (Thread starter):
maybe a 380 upgrade from EY, BA, LH or KE soon? It's about time.

ORD will never be a major A380 hub, AA and UA wont be getting any and the Airport is not located on a coast or has the current facilities to accommodate A380s. ORD being so centrally located kinda hurts with the A380, in the future you may see one or two carriers bring the A380 to ORD, but not anytime soon, LH with the 748 should hold you until then.

What is could see as I have posted before is some one such as AV Picking up ORD-BOG, the local market is small but onward connections at BOG along with the economics of a narrow body could make it work.

ORD-TLV is another potential route, its around 78PDEW and ORD is perfect for connections from Midwest and West. LY or UA are potential takers, although UA already does EWR-TLV, a LY return makes the most sense.


User currently offlineORD2010 From United States of America, joined Sep 2013, 105 posts, RR: 0
Reply 48, posted (1 year 2 months 5 days 5 hours ago) and read 18489 times:

Quoting thekennady (Reply 47):

I think you perfectly captured what I meant my best airport, perhaps yes not the single best, but the most impressive. Absolutely agree, and you're not late! I wouldn't mind this post going for a while it is nice to know what everyone is thinking, since let's face it, people on here are normally right with predictions. Thank you for the comments on the post! I think once EK joins in RJ might suffer the most, although how are their loads? It just feels like they'd be hit the most by EK entering the market.

Where did you hear about AI? I think the 788 is ideal for a complimentary India route with Delhi as Pakistan has a high demand for ORD that could be met. I think ORD-BOM is a fantastic move on AI's part if it comes into fruition. As for 9W like I said I doubt EY is gonna surrender their ORD flight to them so a multi weekly tag along flight on 9W metal would be the most logical, I think they could fare well alongside AI although an EU connection would fare better. Rumor is EY wants to launch a second daily and TK CEO announce plans to launch a second daily ORD soon when they announced BOS. So I think the market for EK is more than there I see EK growing into Asia and the Mideast next now that the last few holes in Europe are being plugged (along with EDI like I said LIS/OSL/BCN/MXP are the next logical a and KEF and far down the road Kiev and ATH. I think the demand for Russia is there just not the right way to serve it as of now. If JJ launches ORD it'd be in place of AA unless AA gets their rights granted soon, knowing how big AA is in Brazil them not flying GRU-ORD but instead UA is prime example of what US CEO said that AA just let UA take ORD and they didn't put up a fight. LY I think we will absolutely see in 2014 and PIA returning 2xs weekly via BCN (a needed EU market).

Like I said BR definitely will be coming it's not an if but a when, and whether it'll be TPE-KIX/NRT-ORD or nonstop, I think non stop because with 5 daily 777's connecting the two on 4 carriers another won't get the traffic so a nonstop would be much more appealing in my opinion and would be nice to see their tail at T5 along with HU. Although I expect we will see KIX make a come back and be successful at ORD given the rising amount of Asian tourism at ORD, I expect KE to send one of their 748's here and OZ to go daily next year for good. What's your outlook on other Asian carriers? I think PR is poised to make a comeback to ORD and they've hinted at it. The tails at ORD are the best mix from all over, where else can you see 10 rjs then 77's from Asia to South America them a 737 followed by a 787 from Eastern Europe with 3 744's behind it? It's amazing and I'm so glad UA is bringing the 744's home! I agree with how ORD works it's more about frequencies than single capacities so an a380 is tough, but I expect eventually either LH, BA, KE and further EK to attempt a 380 when the gates are available and only EK and LH I see keeping it year round as the ORD-Germany market I'd say is the second largest in the US behind JFK/EWR.

Could we ever see a one stop flight to New Zealand or Australia (Star and OW hubs) to ORD? Or is that totally out of the question? Didn't Qantas try once?

Anyways thanks everyone for your inputs!


User currently offlineHNL From United States of America, joined Sep 2004, 354 posts, RR: 1
Reply 49, posted (1 year 2 months 5 days 3 hours ago) and read 18351 times:

AA and UA need to be allowed to build FIS facilities in T1 and T3 respectively. That would solve the T5 capacity issues and eliminate the need to transport aircraft from T5 to T1/T3 for international departures.


HNL - There's no place like it!
User currently offlinejayunited From United States of America, joined Jan 2013, 1018 posts, RR: 2
Reply 50, posted (1 year 2 months 5 days 2 hours ago) and read 18302 times:

Quoting ORD2010 (Reply 48):
I agree with how ORD works it's more about frequencies than single capacities so an a380 is tough, but I expect eventually either LH, BA, KE and further EK to attempt a 380 when the gates are available and only EK and LH I see keeping it year round as the ORD-Germany market I'd say is the second largest in the US behind JFK/EWR.

You don't think that if LH put the A380 on the FRA-ORD-FRA route that frequency would end up being cut? During the summer there are 4 nonstops between ORD-FRA all on 772's and 744's. If LH put the A380 wouldn't UA have to sacrifice one of their nonstops probably flight 944 or is the market really that big that ORD could sustain what would be one 772, two 744's (remember UA is placing the 744 on this route in 2014) and one A380? It would be amazing to see the daily A380 service here at ORD and with LH and UA dominating the ORD-FRA market I sure the A380 could work out I'm just worried about the frequency because 944 is normally filled with a lot of passengers who are making early morning connections in FRA which is why the flight leaves at 2:35pm out of ORD.


User currently offlinethekennady From United States of America, joined Nov 2008, 394 posts, RR: 0
Reply 51, posted (1 year 2 months 5 days 1 hour ago) and read 18184 times:

Quoting ORD2010 (Reply 48):
I think once EK joins in RJ might suffer the most

Well, Looking at a map of the middle east, Jordan is considerably further west that the UAE, also Chicago has a Sizeable Jordanian population many who are loyal to RJ. RJ can offer connections in the middle east that wont require as much backtracking as Connecting via DXB with EK. Of course RJ does not have nearly a extensive route system as EK, but RJ is good and finding its niche and I think it will be ok as long as they continue to work with AA. I know the RJ flight fluctuates from daily to 4 and 5 times weekly now but I don't see RJ going anywhere because they have served ORD for a while and have a solid reputation and costumer base. They also will be getting 787s starting next year and im sure ORD will see them. Jcwr56 should know about the loads on the flights.

Quoting ORD2010 (Reply 48):
Where did you hear about AI? I think the 788 is ideal for a complimentary India route with Delhi as Pakistan has a high demand for ORD that could be met

Was reading a Article after AI started going nonstop on ORD-DEL, there was a celebration by some of the Leaders of AI in Chicago and numerous spokespersons hinted that AI was looking at ORD-BOM once the 787s came in. This may be true but im sure they may wait until BOM is finished with the new terminal additions. 787 would be perfect and if AI started a enhanced Codeshare with UA this flight could work.

Quoting ORD2010 (Reply 48):
LIS/OSL/BCN/MXP are the next logical a and KEF and far down the road Kiev and ATH

UA or AA yes, these secondary markets from Europe could work, I like what UA has done moving some of its Europe flights from EWR to ORD in SNN and soon EDI. KEF I would see but maybe not from FI because they like to target markets with Either large O&D to Iceland or markets that don't have much service to Europe so they can push connections through KEF. FI would have a ton of competition for connections from ORD, this may be one of the main reasons they dont fly to ORD. IB or AA to BCN, SK maybe to OSL once they become more stable.

Quoting ORD2010 (Reply 48):
I expect KE to send one of their 748's here and OZ to go daily next year for good. What's your outlook on other Asian carriers? I think PR is poised to make a comeback to ORD and they've hinted at it

Yes PR and BR would be my best Guesses for service additions. Most the other Viable markets and Airlines that could make ORD work are already there. NRT, ICN, HKG, PEK can take care of connections to the secondary east Asian markets so there is not much left that would make sense from ORD. PR could target the fairly large Philippine population in the Chicago suburbs, but that going to be mostly price sensitive VFR traffic that the Other carriers already accommodate. PR from what I heard was have issues at YYZ filling the plane and Toronto even has a larger Philippine population that Chicago. If PR came in 3 times weekly or so, could they still compete with the daily flights and connections available at the before mentioned Asian hubs?

Quoting ORD2010 (Reply 48):
LY I think we will absolutely see in 2014 and PIA returning 2xs weekly via BCN (a needed EU market).

LY, like I said the City has been campaigning for a TLV route and it should happen. As for PIA, I would be very surprised if they returned to ORD. 2 times weekly would not be able to compete with QR, EY, and the European carriers offering daily connections though their hubs. I flew ORD-AUH-KWI last year on EY and saw a good number of Pakistanis on the ORD-AUH flight making connections through AUH. The BCN sector flight would cater to leisure traffic and with only twice a week im not sure it would hold up. PIA is in trouble financially and they need to clean up their act before launching anymore routes.

Quoting ORD2010 (Reply 48):
Could we ever see a one stop flight to New Zealand or Australia (Star and OW hubs) to ORD? Or is that totally out of the question? Didn't Qantas try once?

I think QF approached the city a while back but it never came to be. One stop connections are already available to Australia or New Zealand via LAX, SFO, DFW,YVR and some of the Asian hubs. I don't think NZ or QF would really need to fly their metal to ORD, when alliance connections are available in the US already.

Quoting HNL (Reply 49):
AA and UA need to be allowed to build FIS facilities in T1 and T3 respectively. That would solve the T5 capacity issues and eliminate the need to transport aircraft from T5 to T1/T3 for international departures.

That would be a dream come true, but where would they put the Facilities is the Question.

Quoting jayunited (Reply 50):
It would be amazing to see the daily A380 service here at ORD

Agreed, but could T1 even accommodate the A380? there are 5 gates there that have double jet bridges but I don't believe the A380 could fit, only T5 would have the tarmac space for it and that would require a departure out of T5 as well. Id rather see smaller planes and more frequencies than sacrificing just for the A380, the 748 is no joke and im glad its coming, should be good for now.


User currently offlineord2010 From United States of America, joined Sep 2013, 105 posts, RR: 0
Reply 52, posted (1 year 2 months 5 days ago) and read 18026 times:

Quoting jayunited (Reply 50):
You don't think that if LH put the A380 on the FRA-ORD-FRA route that frequency would end up being cut? During the summer there are 4 nonstops between ORD-FRA all on 772's and 744's. If LH put the A380 wouldn't UA have to sacrifice one of their nonstops probably flight 944 or is the market really that big that ORD could sustain what would be one 772, two 744's (remember UA is placing the 744 on this route in 2014) and one A380? It would be amazing to see the daily A380 service here at ORD and with LH and UA dominating the ORD-FRA market I sure the A380 could work out I'm just worried about the frequency because 944 is normally filled with a lot of passengers who are making early morning connections in FRA which is why the flight leaves at 2:35pm out of ORD.

As good as the LH/UA relationship is I doubt UA will just give up a frequency on such a key route. I think what could happen is the UA 744 returns to a 772 (I was not aware they were upgrading to a 744 next year, good for ORD to see a lot more of the queen next year.) and the 380 replace on of LH's 747 flights, In that respect it would be the best choice to keep the frequencies and in winter downgrade to a 748. But like mentioned I'd rather see more LH tails daily than one big one a day.

Quoting thekennady (Reply 51):
Was reading a Article after AI started going nonstop on ORD-DEL, there was a celebration by some of the Leaders of AI in Chicago and numerous spokespersons hinted that AI was looking at ORD-BOM once the 787s came in. This may be true but im sure they may wait until BOM is finished with the new terminal additions. 787 would be perfect and if AI started a enhanced Codeshare with UA this flight could work.

That sounds awesome, although I hear AI is looking into OW now, although on a strategic point for me they should keep trying for star because it will open many more doors for them and benefit their current routes. I think AI could work an enhanced code with AI seeing as they are trying to build up star carriers and routes at ORD to combat AA and OW.

Quoting thekennady (Reply 51):
UA or AA yes, these secondary markets from Europe could work, I like what UA has done moving some of its Europe flights from EWR to ORD in SNN and soon EDI. KEF I would see but maybe not from FI because they like to target markets with Either large O&D to Iceland or markets that don't have much service to Europe so they can push connections through KEF. FI would have a ton of competition for connections from ORD, this may be one of the main reasons they dont fly to ORD. IB or AA to BCN, SK maybe to OSL once they become more stable.

Agreed. Although in the state IB is in BCN will be much more viable with AA than them. I totally agree with the UA bit, it is fantastic to see those two markets added and doing well im sure EDI is going to sell well, and I could see one more niche market launched by UA next year from ORD, i think it will be MXP. OSL I have a feeling Norwegian might beat SK, their 787's are there and going to fly all around and if they can make OSL-FLL work they can definitely make ORD work, although they are a vacation carrier and ORD carries more business pax. How are the loads on SK's ORD flights? They seem to do well. who do you think would fly KEF? I don't see UA, maybe AA.

Quoting thekennady (Reply 51):
LY, like I said the City has been campaigning for a TLV route and it should happen. As for PIA, I would be very surprised if they returned to ORD.

It would be nice to see the Star of David tail lined up at T5, and I think we will definitely see it in 2014, if not a tulip... I mean globe heading there. PIA made the route work before only twice weekly I believe via BCN carrying leisure heavy, and they filed and were set to resume in summer, however equipment issues suspended the flights to the 3 pakistani destinations in 2010-11 years and then their money crisis ended this re-launch before it took off and with many bookings. Once straightened out I could see their return.

Quoting thekennady (Reply 51):
Yes PR and BR would be my best Guesses for service additions. Most the other Viable markets and Airlines that could make ORD work are already there

I think with the current outlook we will see BR announcing ORD next year. PR I could see making ORD work but not daily, like you said maybe 3xs weekly and it would be good for the area as most people don't want to backtrack to YYZ to fly over that distance again later.

Quoting thekennady (Reply 51):
Agreed, but could T1 even accommodate the A380? there are 5 gates there that have double jet bridges but I don't believe the A380 could fit, only T5 would have the tarmac space for it and that would require a departure out of T5 as well. Id rather see smaller planes and more frequencies than sacrificing just for the A380, the 748 is no joke and im glad its coming, should be good for now.

  

This post has been going great, love knowing all the information. If anyone has the loads for all the new routes from ORD this year (long haul) It would be fantastic and the demand for the new routes.


User currently offlineckfred From United States of America, joined Apr 2001, 5294 posts, RR: 1
Reply 53, posted (1 year 2 months 4 days 8 hours ago) and read 17684 times:

Years ago, there was a plan for 2 new terminals at ORD, plus work on Terminals 1 and 3. T1 was to be UA/UA Express domestic (and I would presume AC for Canadian airport with pre-clearance). T2 was for UA international/Star/UA international codeshares. T3 was for AA/AE and (this really dates the plan) CP for Canadian airports with pre-clearance. A new T4 (connected to T3) would be for AA international/oneworld/AA international codeshares. T5 was for international carriers unaffilated with UA or AA (meaning SkyTeam). A new T6 would have been for domestic carriers other than UA and AA. At the time, that would have been TW, DL, CO, US, NW, as well as new carriers.

I seem to recall that NW really had an issue with UA and AA having there own Customs and Immigration facilities outside of Terminal 5, because its new terminal at DTW was going to allow easier connections from internatioal flights to NW domestic flights. It felt that it needed every possible advantage, in order to compete with the UA and AA hubs at ORD.

Considering how T3 and T1 are so much nicer than T2, I wonder if DL would raise the same objections today about this plan that NW was raising more than a decade ago.

I know that a western terminal is now the plan for future gate expansion, in order to get the suburbs on board with the overall modernization plan. But, no one has shown how passengers, baggage, cargo, and mail will connect between the western terminal and Terminals 1,2,3, and 5, remote parking, and the rental car garage. Trying to put the ATS underground between the western terminal and T1, as well as some kind of road system for tugs pulling baggage carts and buses from the employee parking lots will be difficult.

Quoting ORD2010 (Reply 38):
its gonna be off the main road by where the access road begins, http://www.bizjournals.com/chicago/n...o-get-new-rental-car.html?page=all gives you the break down. This is what it'll look like


Is this where the current cell phone lot is located? If the entrance to the new rental car facility is going to be off Mannheim Rd., then they have to look at the current situation on I-190. The exit to northbound Mannheim is just past the toll plaza for traffic exiting from southbound I-294. There is a lot of jockeying for position, as cars on I-190 try to get onto the exit ramp for Mannheim, and cars from southbound I-294 try to figure out where to be for the approach to Terminals 1,2, and 3.

Further, considering the number of people who rent cars at ORD, the airport will need to either run longer trains on the ATS (airport train) or run them more frequently. But, it ought to clear out a fair number of buses on the roadways going to arrivals and departures.

But, what is the plan for all of the rental car lots, once the new consolidated rental car facility opens? I'm assuming that some of the parking displaced by the new consolidated facility will go where the rental car lots are now.


User currently offlineLFutia From Netherlands, joined Dec 2002, 3352 posts, RR: 31
Reply 54, posted (1 year 2 months 4 days 3 hours ago) and read 17467 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting ORDTLV2414 (Reply 46):
hahaha. that is ludicrous. DL is such a small player here in Chicago. This is a UA/AA City.

Not necessarily everytime I look up in the sky and I live 12 miles Northeast from ORD its either AA UA or DL gracing the skies.. Yes AA and UA are the major players but you don't see a lot of B6 or VX in the air.

Leo/ORD



Leo/ORD -- Groetjes uit de VS! -- Heeft u laatst nog met KLM gevlogen?
User currently offlinejayunited From United States of America, joined Jan 2013, 1018 posts, RR: 2
Reply 55, posted (1 year 2 months 3 days 14 hours ago) and read 17179 times:

Quoting ckfred (Reply 53):
I seem to recall that NW really had an issue with UA and AA having there own Customs and Immigration facilities outside of Terminal 5, because its new terminal at DTW was going to allow easier connections from internatioal flights to NW domestic flights. It felt that it needed every possible advantage, in order to compete with the UA and AA hubs at ORD.

Considering how T3 and T1 are so much nicer than T2, I wonder if DL would raise the same objections today about this plan that NW was raising more than a decade ago.

I understand that perhaps NW and now DL has an issue with both AA and UA having their own FIS facilities located in their own respective terminals. But those objections should be discarded. The city has invested billions at ORD updating the airfield by building new parallel runways and new wider taxi ways so that ORD can finally get rid of multiple intersecting runways. Once that project is complete the only thing stoping ORD from living up to its full potential will be the lack of available gate space. When it comes to international travel ORD serves not only Chicago and the surrounding suburbs, but also the rest of Illinois, Southern Wisconsin, Eastern Iowa, and Western part of Indiana. If ORD had more gate available for international arrivals we probably would see more international airlines serving ORD because there is still untapped potential in the market that ORD serves. Delta's objections should be noted and tossed in the trash because this isn't just about AA and UA as some one said earlier in this thread that if AA and UA had their own FIS facilities that would open up T5 for more international carriers. Most European and Middle East carriers want to arrive in the afternoon however this is the same time when the majority of AA's and UA's international flights arrive. Having international carriers depart from T1 and T3 has helped ease some of the congestion at T5 but now at least at UA's T1 ( I don't know about AA's T3) but T1 we are at capacity when it comes to widebodies with LH taking B17, and 16 and now ANA taking C10 together with all of UA international departures T1 is full so we can't accommodate anymore international carriers at T1 and if AA is not at capacity we all of the international carrier they are now servicing from T3 soon they will be.

So by not expanding the terminals by building more gates or perhaps building new terminals ORD growth will be capped. Although ORD may not see regular A380 service the A350's and 787's are coming and the way the gates are currently configured only 777 gates will be able to accommodate both the A350 and 787 due to the wing span of these aircraft. And with the limited number of 777 gates ORD has available at all of the terminals one thing is for sure ORD is not ready to take full advantage of all the work that has been done and is being done to modernize the airfield. I understand that DL does not want to see things change at ORD but AA and UA have a strange relationship at ORD where there is almost a mutual respect with both of these airlines becoming stronger and more secure financially they need to come up with a way to update their terminals expand their terminals and see if they can get FIS facilities located in T1 and T3. Both AA and UA have joined forced before on issues concerning ORD they need to come together now to address this issue.


User currently offlinea380787 From United States of America, joined Jul 2013, 990 posts, RR: 0
Reply 56, posted (1 year 2 months 3 days 13 hours ago) and read 17087 times:

UA can consider adding ORD-KIX and ORD-ICN with 787.

User currently offlinethekennady From United States of America, joined Nov 2008, 394 posts, RR: 0
Reply 57, posted (1 year 2 months 3 days 12 hours ago) and read 16970 times:

Quoting jayunited (Reply 55):

Cant the 787s fit at the 767 gates at concourse C? Would there by any way all star flights could be moved to T1 if the FIS was built? AA would have a tough time moving all OW flights to T3 but with shorter taxi distances AA/OW flights could stay as they are for now. Moving UA and Star from T5 would be a good step in releiving T5. Then if T3 could be expanded past L it would be ideal for AA and OW. A T5 Expansion would then not be needed as badly.


User currently onlinemayor From United States of America, joined Mar 2008, 10600 posts, RR: 14
Reply 58, posted (1 year 2 months 3 days 11 hours ago) and read 16924 times:

Quoting jayunited (Reply 55):

Where is it stated, anywhere, that DL has an objection to UA and AA having their own FIS facilities? All that was stated was that NW at one time, DID have an objection, and all I see on here is DL MIGHT, in the future have an objection, but there is nothing currently. With nothing, internationally, except for ORD-CDG, there really isn't any reason for DL to object (if they were).



"A committee is a group of the unprepared, appointed by the unwilling, to do the unnecessary"----Fred Allen
User currently offlinechicawgo From United States of America, joined Nov 2011, 89 posts, RR: 0
Reply 59, posted (1 year 2 months 3 days 8 hours ago) and read 16786 times:

Quoting ckfred (Reply 53):
Is this where the current cell phone lot is located? If the entrance to the new rental car facility is going to be off Mannheim Rd., then they have to look at the current situation on I-190. The exit to northbound Mannheim is just past the toll plaza for traffic exiting from southbound I-294. There is a lot of jockeying for position, as cars on I-190 try to get onto the exit ramp for Mannheim, and cars from southbound I-294 try to figure out where to be for the approach to Terminals 1,2, and 3.

Further, considering the number of people who rent cars at ORD, the airport will need to either run longer trains on the ATS (airport train) or run them more frequently. But, it ought to clear out a fair number of buses on the roadways going to arrivals and departures.

But, what is the plan for all of the rental car lots, once the new consolidated rental car facility opens? I'm assuming that some of the parking displaced by the new consolidated facility will go where the rental car lots are now.

The new facility will be where the cell phone lot and economy lot F are currently. The facility will have 4100 rental spaces and 2000 public parking spaces on other floors. So this will make up for a lot of the current surface spots (does F have 2000 spaces)?

The ATS shuttle system is being upgraded along with the new facility. They are buying 15 more cars (doubling the capacity).

http://www.suntimes.com/news/cityhal...ade-ohare-people-mover-system.html


User currently offlineord2010 From United States of America, joined Sep 2013, 105 posts, RR: 0
Reply 60, posted (1 year 2 months 3 days 8 hours ago) and read 16788 times:

Quoting a380787 (Reply 56):

UA can consider adding ORD-KIX and ORD-ICN with 787.

Do you think this will happen? I feel like UA isn't giving the 787 and ORD a thought, but ORD-KIX could be a good flight to expand, as for ICN do you think 3 carriers on the route might be too much? maybe seasonal ICN? How are the loads on current ICN flights?

Quoting thekennady (Reply 57):
Cant the 787s fit at the 767 gates at concourse C? Would there by any way all star flights could be moved to T1 if the FIS was built? AA would have a tough time moving all OW flights to T3 but with shorter taxi distances AA/OW flights could stay as they are for now. Moving UA and Star from T5 would be a good step in releiving T5. Then if T3 could be expanded past L it would be ideal for AA and OW. A T5 Expansion would then not be needed as badly

I believe the body and wingspan of the 788 are larger than that of the 767's so therefore I don't think it could use the same gate space. If and FIS is put into T1, big emphasis on the IF, I don't believe it could handle both all of UA's international operations and star operations given there are 11 Star carriers on top of UA which fly multi daily and some will begin multi daily soon and I'm sure we will be seeing the addition of 2-3 more star carriers in the coming years, and AC flies many multi daily to ORD which would require a lot of space, If T1 was made star it would require all of 2 to become UA only and move some of its mainline fleet there and use the remote concourse of 1 to house star alliance operations with some gate changes and expansions. T3 would have to be expanded to house AA and OW and i feel like the space is not there, and that is if we kick DL and all other non OW carriers from the terminal and build a new concourse, there are currently 7 OW carriers not including AA, I'm sure we will be seeing some more soon as well. T5 would have to expanded to house the new non affiliated and Sky team domestic and international flights. So NK and DL in the same place, there are currently 6 skyteam carriers including DL, 7 if we count virgin since they are pretty much sky team. Leaving us with 6 non alliance international carriers operating multi daily and 6 domestic carriers as well, so the now displaced DL and international carriers as well as displaced domestic carriers would use this new T5 space, meaning 19 carriers would use this area, 11 T1/2 and 8 in T3. with time a new terminal would have to be built, somewhere this airport is growing and bursting at its seams!

Quoting mayor (Reply 58):
Where is it stated, anywhere, that DL has an objection to UA and AA having their own FIS facilities? All that was stated was that NW at one time, DID have an objection, and all I see on here is DL MIGHT, in the future have an objection, but there is nothing currently. With nothing, internationally, except for ORD-CDG, there really isn't any reason for DL to object (if they were).

I doubt DL would have any objection now a days with a well established DTW hub, and any complain will probably be tossed aside since they operate less than a handful of destinations that are all domestic and a seasonal daily international flight.


User currently offlinechicawgo From United States of America, joined Nov 2011, 89 posts, RR: 0
Reply 61, posted (1 year 2 months 3 days 8 hours ago) and read 16761 times:

Quoting thekennady (Reply 51):
I think QF approached the city a while back but it never came to be. One stop connections are already available to Australia or New Zealand via LAX, SFO, DFW,YVR and some of the Asian hubs. I don't think NZ or QF would really need to fly their metal to ORD, when alliance connections are available in the US already.

QF did to a tag to ORD a few times a week a while ago. It didn't last very long.


User currently offlinea380787 From United States of America, joined Jul 2013, 990 posts, RR: 0
Reply 62, posted (1 year 2 months 3 days 7 hours ago) and read 16754 times:

Quoting ord2010 (Reply 60):
Do you think this will happen? I feel like UA isn't giving the 787 and ORD a thought, but ORD-KIX could be a good flight to expand, as for ICN do you think 3 carriers on the route might be too much? maybe seasonal ICN? How are the loads on current ICN flights?

787-8 / 787-9 will go out from all UA hubs (maybe except CLE). It's a matter of time. It would be the long-n-thin workhorse (while trunk routes will be handled by 359s and 787-10s).

ORD-ICN would be to supplement OZ services, as long as their timings complement each other. KE's services are no threat.


User currently offlinethekennady From United States of America, joined Nov 2008, 394 posts, RR: 0
Reply 63, posted (1 year 2 months 3 days 7 hours ago) and read 16723 times:

Quoting ord2010 (Reply 60):

No doubt expansions will have to been made to the terminals, i was talking of a short term solution.


User currently offlinejayunited From United States of America, joined Jan 2013, 1018 posts, RR: 2
Reply 64, posted (1 year 2 months 3 days 1 hour ago) and read 16530 times:

Quoting thekennady (Reply 57):
Cant the 787s fit at the 767 gates at concourse C? Would there by any way all star flights could be moved to T1 if the FIS was built? AA would have a tough time moving all OW flights to T3 but with shorter taxi distances AA/OW flights could stay as they are for now. Moving UA and Star from T5 would be a good step in releiving T5. Then if T3 could be expanded past L it would be ideal for AA and OW. A T5 Expansion would then not be needed as badly.

No the 787 can not fit into the same gates as the 767 gates on the C concourse because the wing span on the 787 is almost the same as the wing span on the 777-200 and there in is the problem the body of the 787 can fit into gates C9, 11, 15,19, and 21 however the wing span will not allow it to fit into those gate. If UA decided to even attempt to park a 787 in one of those gate both gate on either side of the aircraft would need to be taken out of service to accommodate the wing span. So if a 787 was parked at C15 then C11 and C17 would need to be closed to cover the wing span and that is what many people don't understand they just look at the body of the 787 and completely forget about the wings while the plane is on the ground. People pay attention to the wings when the plane takes off because of the wing flex but as it pertains to ORD those wings are very important because ORD does not have enough gates that can accommodate a plane that has the wing span of a 777.

To address your second comment terminal 1 in its current layout is not big enough to accommodate all of the Star's departures but if new concourses were built or even new terminals ORD could move all of Star into one place and all of OW into one place as well. My only point is the city has spent and is still spending millions of dollars updating the airfield once all the runways and new taxiways are built the only thing that will serve as a hinderance to ORD living up to its potential will be the old out dated terminals. The next project that the city, AA and UA needs to tackle is the terminals because in there current condition and configuration they will stall any growth plans ORD could possibly experience and that would be domestically as well as internationally. ORD's terminals are in desperate need of modernization and expansion hopefully we will see something happening soon.


User currently offlinejetblastdubai From United States of America, joined Aug 2013, 768 posts, RR: 0
Reply 65, posted (1 year 2 months 2 days 13 hours ago) and read 16372 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

From an ATC perspective, I hope the final plan takes into consideration flow to and from the runways (safely) in addition to gate capacity. I've seen probably hundreds of proposals in the past decades about the O'Hare expansion plans...some good and some, very bad.

Gate expansion will be limited until 32L goes away, at least the southern section of it that is south of taxiway H. Once 10C opens I would think that 32L will be the next go and that would free up all sorts of space. Ideally, for airport flow, it'd be very efficient to add terminal(s) parallel to the C terminal and simply add more as needed. To maximize real estate, the new terminal could be chevron-shaped...running parallel to C and then at mid-field angle back towards the south-east. This would provide flow-thru for all traffic and eliminate the random terminal design like JFK, LHR. Confusing airports create issues for pilots that might be unfamiliar with an airport and can lead to runway incursions, taxiway conflictions and general frustration for all involved. A simple design such as ATL/DTW should be the goal.

The drawback to going to all parallel runway ops is the general inefficiency for departures in IFR weather. The rules for departing on parallel runways is very different than during VFR weather. With intersecting runways, the departure capacity is virtually unchanged depending on the runway combination. Likewise, arrivals to converging runways can be far more efficient than parallels when the weather on the ground is good but the cloud base is 5,000' or less. Being able to vector an arrival to a localizer with no parallel traffic gives the controller many more options to shorten a flight path. There are no 'slam dunks' on parallel runway ops with a ceiling below 5,000' generally.



A good landing is one you can walk away from. A great landing is when you can re-use the aircraft.
User currently offlinethekennady From United States of America, joined Nov 2008, 394 posts, RR: 0
Reply 66, posted (1 year 2 months 2 days 11 hours ago) and read 16273 times:

Quoting jetblastdubai (Reply 65):
Gate expansion will be limited until 32L

Yes, there is simply not room past C concourse until 32L/14 is removed. 4L/22R also could cause some issues because the approach area must not be blocked by a terminal or any other building. 4L its hardly ever used for landings but 22L is. The only other expansion to the domestic terminals that would be viable would be to expand T3 past L. There are a series of buildings to the north of L that would have to be demolished and im not sure what those buildings hold and how easily or where they could be replaced. ORD has not seen any significant terminal additions since 93 so something has to be in the works if ORD is to continue to grow as a airport. We know in the USA the Aviation industry is different that any other place in the world, we have many airlines, many hubs and in the USA airports don't tend to be as modern as some of the other smaller countries. All in all its still viable to make sure airports like ORD are ready to meet the future needs of air travel, I don't want to see ORDs potential for growth deferred to other airports due to lack of terminal space or facilities unable to meet the demand of larger aircraft and passenger throughput.

Quoting jayunited (Reply 64):

Thx...ORD is in a bind terminal wise...Worse than I thought


User currently offlineZBA2CGX From Canada, joined Mar 2006, 92 posts, RR: 0
Reply 67, posted (1 year 2 months 2 days 9 hours ago) and read 16180 times:

With the consolidate rental car facility coming and the required use of the people mover. ORD should take a hard look at the passenger flows within the terminal to the ATS bridges / stations.
Right now it can be a little confusing to get from the poor signage and back tracking to get to the right escalator to the people mover. The terminal facade project helped, but it was still funnelling passengers to the lower level to get the rental car buses (T1 and T3 both do this).
At least in T2 you have the option to skip around this and go around the down escalator to the baggage claim and directly to ATS up escalator. T1 should create an opening in front of the escalator bank to the c gates so you can directly walk out. I have no idea what to do with T3.

Travelling with a family with luggage/car seats, hauling children up and down all the escalators I would be very annoyed.



Just a reminder, the ORD community day is on Sunday September 29 starting at 9am if you racing on the runway run
http://chicagoevents.com/event.cfm?eid=272


User currently offlinenomorerjs From United States of America, joined Sep 2004, 524 posts, RR: 0
Reply 68, posted (1 year 2 months 2 days 9 hours ago) and read 16161 times:

QF never started ORD. They dropped the planned MEL-LAX-ORD route during the SCARS scare.

User currently offlinethekennady From United States of America, joined Nov 2008, 394 posts, RR: 0
Reply 69, posted (1 year 2 months 2 days 9 hours ago) and read 16184 times:



This is my rendering of what would most likely be the best improvements to the terminals for ORD in the future. Light green represents the terminal additions and the red represents the nearby buildings or runways that would have to eliminated. Must also keep the immediate approach area to 4L/22R clear. The Chevron shaped satellite concourse at terminal 1 would add around 20 gates including 6-7 wide body gates. A underground tunnel would connect C and the rest of terminal 1 to the new concourse. At T3 a additional concourse to the north would add 10 gates and allow AA to take over all of L, all the other carriers currently at T3 would move to the new concourse and it would have 1-2 wide body gates. T5 would be expanded further west enough so that the far end of the concourse would allow for gates on each side. This addition would add 8-9 gates with 1 A380 capable. Some buildings in the vicinity of T5 would have to be demolished.


User currently onlinesovietjet From Bulgaria, joined Mar 2003, 2639 posts, RR: 17
Reply 70, posted (1 year 2 months 2 days 9 hours ago) and read 16146 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

It still boggles my mind that ORD being one of the top airports in the world (both aircraft movements and passenger traffic) still has no A-380s and no Emirates. Not that I particularly care about Emirates being here but you'd think they would fly to ORD given they fly these pointless prestige routes to other destinations that just seem weird (like Seattle, or Dallas and Houston simultaneously instead of just one).

[Edited 2013-09-24 12:20:17]

User currently offlineLAXdude1023 From India, joined Sep 2006, 7758 posts, RR: 25
Reply 71, posted (1 year 2 months 2 days 8 hours ago) and read 16095 times:

Quoting sovietjet (Reply 70):
Not that I particularly care about Emirates being here but you'd think they would fly to ORD given they fly these pointless prestige routes to other destinations that just seem weird (like Seattle, or Dallas and Houston simultaneously instead of just one).

A little bit of an ignorant post if Im reading it right. EK could never get the fare premiums from Chicago they get from Houston. Dallas and Seattle were markets that were underserved (as opposed to Chicago being overserved). Dallas has the single fastest growing market to the Subcontinent in the US and Seattle has a huge cargo component.



Stewed...Lewd...Crude...Irreverent...Belligerent
User currently onlinesovietjet From Bulgaria, joined Mar 2003, 2639 posts, RR: 17
Reply 72, posted (1 year 2 months 2 days 6 hours ago) and read 15976 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting LAXdude1023 (Reply 71):
Dallas and Seattle were markets that were underserved (as opposed to Chicago being overserved)

I don't know enough to say, but how can more people be flying from Seattle to Dubai as opposed to Chicago to Dubai? Chicago has a much bigger and more diverse population. And higher Arab population as well. As for Dallas and Houston, it just seems given the proximity of the two cities to each other one flight would be enough to serve both.


User currently offlinesteex From United States of America, joined Jun 2007, 1731 posts, RR: 9
Reply 73, posted (1 year 2 months 2 days 6 hours ago) and read 15964 times:

Quoting sovietjet (Reply 72):
I don't know enough to say, but how can more people be flying from Seattle to Dubai as opposed to Chicago to Dubai? Chicago has a much bigger and more diverse population. And higher Arab population as well. As for Dallas and Houston, it just seems given the proximity of the two cities to each other one flight would be enough to serve both.

The point is that EK's market isn't just YYY-DXB, it's YYY-DXB-ZZZ where ZZZ is a lot of destinations in the Middle East, South Asia, and Africa. EK was the first Middle Eastern carrier to enter Seattle, so it is primarily against the European hubs for those flows. In Chicago, EK would be fighting EY's YYY-AUH-ZZZ, QR's YYY-DOH-ZZZ, TK's YYY-IST-ZZZ, AI's ORD-DEL-ZZZ, and all of the European carriers (of which there are many more options than at Seattle). The point isn't that Seattle has more absolute demand than Chicago, it's that Seattle may very well have relatively more demand compared to the already available supply.

I don't doubt that EK will end up at ORD some day, but it's just a matter of priorities.


User currently offlineLAXdude1023 From India, joined Sep 2006, 7758 posts, RR: 25
Reply 74, posted (1 year 2 months 2 days 6 hours ago) and read 15960 times:

Quoting sovietjet (Reply 72):
As for Dallas and Houston, it just seems given the proximity of the two cities to each other one flight would be enough to serve both.

I guess you dont know the market. Again, youre talking about the world wide oil capital and the center of the telecomunnication market for the Americas. Both generate large amounts of traffic to the destinations Emirates serves. Are they as large as Chicago? No, but Chicago has so many carriers serving those markets as it is. It would have been an eaiser decision to serve DFW and IAH before ORD if I was EK given the ridiculous competition at ORD.



Stewed...Lewd...Crude...Irreverent...Belligerent
User currently offlineUnited787 From United States of America, joined May 2005, 2745 posts, RR: 2
Reply 75, posted (1 year 2 months 2 days 5 hours ago) and read 15907 times:

Quoting thekennady (Reply 69):
This is my rendering of what would most likely be the best improvements to the terminals for ORD in the future.

That is exactly what I have had in my mind. With that plan, would the new T1 concourse be UA/*A international? Where would you put AA/OW international?


User currently offlinethekennady From United States of America, joined Nov 2008, 394 posts, RR: 0
Reply 76, posted (1 year 2 months 2 days 2 hours ago) and read 15742 times:

Quoting United787 (Reply 75):
T1 concourse be UA/*A international? Where would you put AA/OW international?

UA and Star INTL would go to the new concourse at 1, the AA Oneworld would be tougher to figure out. Space is so limited near T3 and even with the new Concourse north of L its still hard to see where the best place to put the FIS Area. Maybe the new concourse at 3 could be strictly a INTL concourse for AA and Oneworld, would there be enough room is the question.


User currently offlinejetblastdubai From United States of America, joined Aug 2013, 768 posts, RR: 0
Reply 77, posted (1 year 2 months 2 days 1 hour ago) and read 15713 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting thekennady (Reply 69):
This is my rendering of what would most likely be the best improvements to the terminals for ORD in the future

Looks like you put a lot of thought into the airport redesign but I've got to throw some cold water on it right off the bat...sorry. The terminal north of T3 (L gates) cannot ever be built because you would have to remove and relocate the airports heating/cooling plant and that simply will not happen.

The parking space east of T5 is definitely workable but it could also be hardstands in the immediate near term. People are used to riding busses from the plane to the terminal so it's not the end of the world. A bus ride from M40 or M50 and getting dropped off at M9 would be much faster than the walk from M23 to immigration.

As thekennady indicated, 32L is the biggest obstacle blocking western expansion however 4L is also a big issue. I worked ORD for 18+ years and only saw arrivals on 4L twice so it's not worth considering it. Arrivals on 22R would definitely be an issue for any terminals west of the C concourse. Fortunately, with the new parallels, 22R would technically never be needed for arrivals unless the winds were so strong out of the south that none of the E/W runways could be used but then again, if only 22L and 22R were available for operations, the airport would be in meltdown mode anyway. 4L/22R could be removed from the 'available runway' list. Dig it up but leave the portion that would be a nice high-speed exit for 27L. (where it joins txy R)

Looking to the future and trying to fix the mistakes of the past, it would be nice if the airport re-design would eliminate the "Y" gate concept in T2. The congestion in T2 and T3 creates all sorts of congestion problems for everyone...arrivals, departures and on-time operations. T2 makes Dulles look good so it will be no loss if it gets bulldozed in the middle of the night like Mayor Daly did to Meigs. He had the right idea, just the wrong airport.

Wipe out T2 and continue the B concourse along the terminal building to gate G1 and create a flow-thru traffic pattern. You'd then have room to continue the C concourse to approximately gate F14 in the chevron design to maximize space utilization. The entire west side of the new C concourse could be widebody capable. You'd want to keep the taxiways at A8 and A9 to allow for egress. An above ground pedestrian walkway (like DEN) would be a stunning way to connect the old C with the new C without the expense of building an underground passageway. It'd make for the World's best United Club as well if you gave it a glass floor like the Sears Tower has.

The issues that make any expansion/change so hard at ORD is they cannot afford to lose any gates or parking spots during the time it takes for construction. Once 32L is gone, the area north of the 10 pad had lots of room for temp. RJ parking and they could run busses like UAX and Eagle did at LAX for years. After getting off an E145 a ride in a cramped Chicago bus would be an improvement.



A good landing is one you can walk away from. A great landing is when you can re-use the aircraft.
User currently offlinethekennady From United States of America, joined Nov 2008, 394 posts, RR: 0
Reply 78, posted (1 year 2 months 2 days 1 hour ago) and read 15677 times:

Quoting jetblastdubai (Reply 77):
The terminal north of T3 (L gates) cannot ever be built because you would have to remove and relocate the airports heating/cooling plant and that simply will not happen

Yea, I saw the fans on top of some of those building near L and figured they must be some type of plants but did not know how important the were. Oh well.

Quoting jetblastdubai (Reply 77):
The parking space east of T5 is definitely workable but it could also be hardstands in the immediate near term. People are used to riding busses from the plane to the terminal so it's not the end of the world. A bus ride from M40 or M50 and getting dropped off at M9 would be much faster than the walk from M23 to immigration

Yea, those 4 hardstands could allow for arriving pax to be bussed into T5, would be a short term solution. But does T5 have any area where busses can park and where pax can walk into the terminal? These hardstands should be only used during peak hours and only for arriving traffic. I wonder how quickly a bus system could be put in place at T5, this would open up a few more slots during the afternoon rush.

Quoting jetblastdubai (Reply 77):
4L/22R could be removed from the 'available runway' list. Dig it up but leave the portion that would be a nice high-speed exit for 27L. (where it joins txy R)

Would be great to clear up room for West terminal expansion but would eliminate a convenient departure runway in 4L and a crosswind Runway at 22R. Is having dual crosswind runways really that important? if not then keep 32R/14L open and eliminate 4L/22R and 32L/14R


User currently offlinejetblastdubai From United States of America, joined Aug 2013, 768 posts, RR: 0
Reply 79, posted (1 year 2 months 2 days ago) and read 15657 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting thekennady (Reply 78):
Would be great to clear up room for West terminal expansion but would eliminate a convenient departure runway in 4L and a crosswind Runway at 22R. Is having dual crosswind runways really that important? if not then keep 32R/14L open and eliminate 4L/22R and 32L/14R

4L/22R is useless since the 'big plan' is be all parallel runways and take the hits when the rare winds don't favor any E/W runway. That's only a few hours a year and for the benefits of getting more gate space, it's worth it. 14L/32R is actually a very good IFR departure runway on a west operation...same as 22L. IFR departure separation is much more efficient with a non-parallel runway.
ORD terminal layout option


OK, rough draft doesn't even come close to describe my Photoshop skills but here goes. I know the plan at one time was to create 3 circular taxiways around T1 from txy M up to H. You'd have A, B and a continuation of T to provide for the ultimate flexibility in routing A/C or holding for short periods etc. As you can see, with the vast open space where 32L used to be, a new concourse could be added which would rival DTW or DXB in size of a single concourse.



A good landing is one you can walk away from. A great landing is when you can re-use the aircraft.
User currently offlinethekennady From United States of America, joined Nov 2008, 394 posts, RR: 0
Reply 80, posted (1 year 2 months 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 15598 times:

Quoting jetblastdubai (Reply 79):
4L/22R is useless since the 'big plan' is be all parallel runways and take the hits when the rare winds don't favor any E/W runway. That's only a few hours a year and for the benefits of getting more gate space, it's worth it

Yes, but sadly in the master plan 4L/22R stays, I don't know why its being kept because removing it would help terminal expansion greatly, the large concourse you added would not have to be as far away from the rest of T1. The Issue of 4L/22R is actually going to be the biggest issue in the log run because we know 32L/14R is going away but there will still be restrictions.


I like the concept you have at T2, but the question would be how to move all those Rjs out of 2 while its being renovated. maybe build T1 concourse first and then move all T2 operations there while completing the renovations? it would be hard to do it in stages because the whole Y concourse would have to be completely demolished. DL, US, AC and the regional ops form UA would be displaced. Now that we realize T3 cant really be expanded you concept of T2 make a lot of sense.

Quoting jetblastdubai (Reply 77):
The issues that make any expansion/change so hard at ORD is they cannot afford to lose any gates or parking spots during the time it takes for construction. Once 32L is gone, the area north of the 10 pad had lots of room for temp. RJ parking and they could run busses like UAX and Eagle did at LAX for years

Would have to happen though for 2 to be expanded, most likely. Also what would be the function of T2? would it still be mainly a regional terminal? would UA move all ops to T1 along with all star Departures? or could T2 be used as a INTL terminal?


User currently offlinejetblastdubai From United States of America, joined Aug 2013, 768 posts, RR: 0
Reply 81, posted (1 year 2 months 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 15465 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting thekennady (Reply 80):
Yes, but sadly in the master plan 4L/22R stays

If 4L stays, then a whole new set of issues comes up with any terminal expansion. With a new, western concourse, 4L would not be available for arrivals under any circumstances due to obstruction clearance requirements. You cannot have arrival aircraft flying directly over a building with hundreds of people in it. Even worse, the new concourse would eliminate the localizer for 22R. 4L would be a departure only runway...no arrivals to either end of it.

Quoting thekennady (Reply 80):
I like the concept you have at T2, but the question would be how to move all those Rjs out of 2

This is O'Hare's dilemma...they're already at gate capacity so any renovation has to address interim facilities during construction. New, temporary, parking for someone will have to be addressed before anything can be razed and the only space available is to the west.
Option 1: build the new western concourse before anything gets torn down and then go back and level T2.
Option 2: build a temporary, inexpensive (very basic) midfield terminal west of the old 32L and put all T2 regional aircraft there...no exceptions and that includes UA, AC, US and DL RJ's. Demolish concourse E and F one at a time and allow DL/US/AC to put their mainline flights in the remaining outer gates during construction.

There'd have to be a relatively large bus staging area somewhere and the area near B1, B2 and B3 would make the most sense. Might lose access to those gates for A/C for a while but if all the RJs left for the remote, west parking, there'd be lots of mainline gates available at B22.

Potential huge benefit: If the new western concourse is as large as space allows, there might not even be a need for T2 for years which is why option 1 above might make more sense.



A good landing is one you can walk away from. A great landing is when you can re-use the aircraft.
User currently offlineEaglePower83 From United States of America, joined Oct 2011, 275 posts, RR: 0
Reply 82, posted (1 year 2 months 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 15378 times:

Quoting LFutia (Reply 30):
ORD is a craphole when it comes to connecting especially INTL/DOM not one the best airports in the world! I live in the north suburbs and I honestly think ORD needs to be demolished and rebuilt. The signage is horrible and everything about it screams demolish me.

Use hyperbole much? As a native Chicagoan, I must interject that ORD is an extremely easy and useful airport for being the aviation gateway of the nation's 3rd largest metro area.
Is it "THE BEST EVER?" Emotionally I may say yes, but empirically, no it's not the best. But it's quite excellent.
Other than weather delay log jams, traffic flows pretty smoothly for the 2nd busiest airport.
You can get to THREE terminals accessing over half a dozen airlines on the airside with a plethora of shopping and eating. Only international requires to leave the secure area sometimes. There are Domestic/International airside shuttles too.
Let's not joke around. O'Hare is BIG. And it's a lot of walking (which I don't mind if I'm not in a hurry). It's 1.2 miles from the farthest end of T1 to the farthest end of T3.
Sure it needs some updating on the ops and amenities side. But by and large, it's a pretty fantastic airport. You can go practically anywhere, eat or drink practically anything on a cornucopia of airlines with T5 and a very unique dual hub.
Signage is never perfect at any airport, but if you've been though ORD a couple times, its extremely easy to navigate.

Quoting ORD2010 (Reply 38):
Haha, In my opinion I love ORD, to me it represents air travel more than any other airport, but that is my personal opinion aside its delays and mess.

I do too. And I fully agree.
It kinda sucks that so many cart vendors block the huge windows today, but otherwise, it's a fun airport with a lot of hidden treasures (T3 rotunda, T1 dinosaur, T2 Butch OHare plane, Tortas!).


User currently offlineZBA2CGX From Canada, joined Mar 2006, 92 posts, RR: 0
Reply 83, posted (1 year 2 months 1 day 13 hours ago) and read 15335 times:

Why couldn't you put an L / hockey stick shaped Terminal at the southeast end of 32R/14L where the taxi / limo stand is currently located? You could have approximately 8 787 gates there and a bridge over the I-190 to connect to T-5. I'm sure you could pack some more RJ gates there if needed.

You would also have to rearrange the exit from the I-190 to Betsy Coleman drive. Possibly shift Betsy Coleman drive east to where the rental cars are currently located.

This of course would have to be done once 32R/14L is shut down.

The area in Yellow is the terminal, the area in orange is taxiway / apron. It is a copy of the current T5


User currently offlinejsnww81 From United States of America, joined Jan 2002, 2051 posts, RR: 15
Reply 84, posted (1 year 2 months 1 day 13 hours ago) and read 15265 times:

Quoting EaglePower83 (Reply 82):
It kinda sucks that so many cart vendors

The cart vendors have ruined Terminal 1. Circulation space in the concourses is half what it was a decade ago. T2 and T3 seem to have been spared.

I fly out of ORD every week for work and agree - for locals it's generally very functional. Thanks to TSA Pre-Check I can be through security and to my gate in under ten minutes, even on a busy Monday morning. The weather delays - when they occur - are a nightmare, but that's the case for ATL, DFW, the NYC airports, etc. as well. I've had lots of Atlanta-Chicago flights this summer that have been routed over St. Louis and/or Kansas City to detour around thunderstorms, turning a 90-minute flight into a three-hour one. But that's hardly ORD's fault!


User currently offlineHermansCVR580 From United States of America, joined Jul 1999, 510 posts, RR: 1
Reply 85, posted (1 year 2 months 1 day 13 hours ago) and read 15278 times:

How about this?

http://i158.photobucket.com/albums/t100/raether916/ohare.jpg



The right decision at the wrong time, is still a wrong decision. "Hal Carr"
User currently offlinejayunited From United States of America, joined Jan 2013, 1018 posts, RR: 2
Reply 86, posted (1 year 2 months 1 day 12 hours ago) and read 15223 times:

I found this website on the Chicago Department of Aviation website it shows what the runway configurations will be once the modernization project on the airfield is complete. It also shows a western terminal but if my memory serves me correctly didn't both AA and UA sometime during the last decade sue to block the building of a western terminal mainly because they were suppose to help split the cost with the city to build that terminal but since both airlines were cashed strapped they both backed out claiming that ORD does not need more terminals and didn't they also claim they no longer had the money to support such a project? I could be wrong but I do believe at some point both airlines back out of the deal they had with the city of Chicago. However now from attending meeting hosted by UA ORD senior management about the future of ORD which some of these meeting are open to all ORD UA employees I know that UA has changed its stance and wants its own international terminal, and I sure AA senior management at ORD have changed their minds as well. So I'm not sure if the western terminal will be built or if that part of the expansion project is dead but here is what ORD was supposed to look like before the airlines ran into financial trouble.

http://www.flychicago.com/OHare/EN/A...izationProgram/programdetails.aspx


User currently offlineord2010 From United States of America, joined Sep 2013, 105 posts, RR: 0
Reply 87, posted (1 year 2 months 1 day 12 hours ago) and read 15169 times:

Quoting HermansCVR580 (Reply 85):

How about this?

http://i158.photobucket.com/albums/t...e.jpg

It would be amazing if ORD looked like that, although I think the terminals would have to be bigger to handle the amount of people, however to remotely reach a plan like that it would require immense gate closures that would hinder ORD useless and cause a mess for years except in the expansion of T5. Given the new T5 renovation with the addition of things like Michael Kors, Armani, a quick spa, I think the new T5 is here to stay. I do think the next expansion we will see is one to T5 then after a long argument with AA/UA to the other 3 terminals, although I expect just lengthy renovations and maybe a new concourse somewhere, but due to the runway any space is confined and not enough to add all the gates needed. Ideal would be if ORD had 4 terminals which would be Star Alliance, OW, non affiliated domestic, and skyteam/non affiliated internationsal with extra gates to handle overflow and new carriers, all 3 terminals handling international flights has their own TIS and at least 1 380 gate and new double jet bridge gates throughout. But being realistic I think the western terminal complex and T5 expansion, slowly becoming an LHR type of layout but never the less growing, seeing new flights from AI. EK, 9W, BR, SU starting. LY and PIA resuming, new frequencies from AA and UA the gate space is needed, NK will definitely expand with new service and US and DL adding a frequency here and there. It would be nice to see a Hawaiian 767 here too.

Quoting EaglePower83 (Reply 82):
Use hyperbole much? As a native Chicagoan, I must interject that ORD is an extremely easy and useful airport for being the aviation gateway of the nation's 3rd largest metro area.
Is it "THE BEST EVER?" Emotionally I may say yes, but empirically, no it's not the best. But it's quite excellent.

Fully agree, It is far from perfect but for its size it is pretty darn close for the age the airport has. Having flown multiple times into ORD and connected I find it very easy to move around and T3 is very nice in my opinion, you haven't been through MIA (excluding the new T J ) if you think ORD is crap. Try having a large domestic concourse with only a single functional bathroom, a pizza hut to go and a news cart and the windows are so dirty you can't see through them. Or try using the OW area to fly internationally, the lack of light is astonishing and so are the carpets that look like they've swam the atlantic and back.

Quoting EaglePower83 (Reply 82):
I do too. And I fully agree.
It kinda sucks that so many cart vendors block the huge windows today, but otherwise, it's a fun airport with a lot of hidden treasures (T3 rotunda, T1 dinosaur, T2 Butch OHare plane, Tortas!).

Love exploring the main terminal complex of ORD so much fun and so many secrets and great food from cheesecake to dogs and pizza to a good goose island 312 brew. Love the Trex for the field museum and the little pockets of awesome here and there that make ORD the best airport I like to fly through and you can walk through them without exiting security. Perhaps my favorite things to do is sit at L and look at T5 an watch the impossibly large amount of heavies move around, at some hours you feel like you're spotting at LHR or ZRH with all EU tails, other times you feel like you're spotting in IST with all middle eastern tails and it is an unmatched experience having flown to many airports in the America's and EU/ME. I love it and I want to see it grow, when I book flights I try to fly through ORD knowing I'll have a good time, good food, and an incredible view.


User currently offlinejcwr56 From United States of America, joined Jul 2012, 539 posts, RR: 1
Reply 88, posted (1 year 2 months 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 15133 times:

For those who might be interested, there was an outside operation exercise done yesterday on UA850. It was parked on M21A (yes, a new line painted behind M21). Two sets of passenger stairs and the people walked into T5 lower level where M21 is located.

This is one option being looked at to help those flights who might hold due to gate delays. Before any naysayers start to say, what, people don't want to walk in. It was announced they had two options onboard, wait the 45 minutes it was planned for yesterday or try this. From block in time to last passenger off the plane and into the building 13 or so minutes.

There are 6 locations to piggyback aircraft on the ramp. There's a priority to where they can park them, but the one that was used yesterday is the best.

Bussing, that's too being looked at. However, there's the little issue of where to move the aircraft that current park there now during daily operations. VS, BA, F9....The 28 hold pad is out of question and the former Lynx building ramp area operationally is very difficult to get in and out of. I'm not saying they couldn't park there, but logistically getting a plane in/out from the FAA's perspective is hard.

Although there's been plenty of discussion on what's next for ORD. I think we'll see most carriers wait till after the IATA SC and what's available for timings before new announcements are made.

[Edited 2013-09-25 09:53:07]

User currently offlineEaglePower83 From United States of America, joined Oct 2011, 275 posts, RR: 0
Reply 89, posted (1 year 2 months 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 15105 times:

Quoting ord2010 (Reply 87):
I love it and I want to see it grow, when I book flights I try to fly through ORD knowing I'll have a good time, good food, and an incredible view.

And if you go look out the windows at the very end of T3 - H, you can see the Chicago skyline.
Pictures don't do it justice. Just go and look. It's pretty cool  
Quoting jsnww81 (Reply 84):
The cart vendors have ruined Terminal 1. Circulation space in the concourses is half what it was a decade ago. T2 and T3 seem to have been spared.

Agreed! Besides T2 being pretty crappy, when I flew UA a lot, I liked T1 but the congestion was pretty crazy for such a large terminal. The carts in the hallways do not help at all. They make it worse.
When my friends and I flew to Tampa on AA last year, it was our first time in T3 in many years.........and we noticed the difference. We like T3 WAYYYY more than all the other terminals. It's not as "cool" looking as T1, but it's very nice and very roomy with some of the best views at the entire airport.


User currently offlineord2010 From United States of America, joined Sep 2013, 105 posts, RR: 0
Reply 90, posted (1 year 2 months 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 15035 times:

Quoting EaglePower83 (Reply 89):
Agreed! Besides T2 being pretty crappy, when I flew UA a lot, I liked T1 but the congestion was pretty crazy for such a large terminal. The carts in the hallways do not help at all. They make it worse.
When my friends and I flew to Tampa on AA last year, it was our first time in T3 in many years.........and we noticed the difference. We like T3 WAYYYY more than all the other terminals. It's not as "cool" looking as T1, but it's very nice and very roomy with some of the best views at the entire airport.

I've flown through T3 a lot when flying just into ORD (NK gives good random deals) and I love it, it compares to when I went to DUS, very roomy love the tile floor, views are amazing and love the big dogs boarding for hundreds of destinations.

Quoting EaglePower83 (Reply 89):
And if you go look out the windows at the very end of T3 - H, you can see the Chicago skyline.
Pictures don't do it justice. Just go and look. It's pretty cool  

An AA 772 at ORD is what first got me into aviation, I liked planes but when I went to Chicago for the first time and walked past one and my eyes went wide at the engines I couldn't believe how large they were, now I know they're only RR's not even the GE90's. But that moment at ORD watching a 744 at T5 (first time seeing a 747) and heavies taking off and the skyline in the back I knew aviation was my thing! So ORD holds a dear place in my heart.


User currently offlinethekennady From United States of America, joined Nov 2008, 394 posts, RR: 0
Reply 91, posted (1 year 2 months 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 14947 times:

Quoting ord2010 (Reply 90):
ORD holds a dear place in my heart.

Same here, I have childhood memories of being at ORD with my Parents going to pick up relatives and I remember how exciting it was to see so many planes taking off and landing. I could always rely on ORD to put on a show. When I saw a plane take off or land I knew that another one was not far behind, ORD never disappointed me. Now that I am older and understand Aviation better ORD impresses me even more, i sometimes even get excited just looking at the flight Arrivals online. ORD is truly a gem and what goes on there in a typical day is Amazing but has become routine for the folks at ORD. To know that ORD is not even near its peak passenger and aircraft movement wise is exciting because it still has upside.


User currently offlineord2010 From United States of America, joined Sep 2013, 105 posts, RR: 0
Reply 92, posted (1 year 2 months 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 14910 times:

Quoting thekennady (Reply 91):
Same here, I have childhood memories of being at ORD with my Parents going to pick up relatives and I remember how exciting it was to see so many planes taking off and landing. I could always rely on ORD to put on a show. When I saw a plane take off or land I knew that another one was not far behind, ORD never disappointed me. Now that I am older and understand Aviation better ORD impresses me even more, i sometimes even get excited just looking at the flight Arrivals online. ORD is truly a gem and what goes on there in a typical day is Amazing but has become routine for the folks at ORD. To know that ORD is not even near its peak passenger and aircraft movement wise is exciting because it still has upside.

I on that boat with you! I have app and I just love scrolling through the daily flights, seeing miami, new york, berlin, los angeles, toronto, abu dhabi, london, tokyo, charlotte, atlanta, hong kong, beijing, stockholm, the array is just amazing I have a map on that app I've placed every international destination served from ORD, I'd need 10 maps to track domestic flights. It is a gem to me one of the last places you can feel like you're in the good ole days of Pan Am flying and the view of the city and airport is just breath taking, ORD is the best!


User currently offlineteme82 From Finland, joined Mar 2007, 1609 posts, RR: 0
Reply 93, posted (1 year 2 months 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 14907 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

How about yearly ORD-HEL for AA!


Flying high and low
User currently offlineord2010 From United States of America, joined Sep 2013, 105 posts, RR: 0
Reply 94, posted (1 year 2 months 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 14864 times:

Quoting teme82 (Reply 93):

How about yearly ORD-HEL for AA!

One can dream! the summer does well why not non daily winter? would love to see finnair here


User currently offlineteme82 From Finland, joined Mar 2007, 1609 posts, RR: 0
Reply 95, posted (1 year 2 months 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 14823 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting ord2010 (Reply 94):

One can dream! the summer does well why not non daily winter? would love to see finnair here

Well AY don't have the planes. AA might have after the merger. An A330 would do fine.



Flying high and low
User currently offlineord2010 From United States of America, joined Sep 2013, 105 posts, RR: 0
Reply 96, posted (1 year 2 months 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 14759 times:

Quoting teme82 (Reply 95):
Well AY don't have the planes. AA might have after the merger. An A330 would do fine.

couldn't one of their 330's do the trick? or maybe a 340? problem being their equipment is all tied up as you said and nothing is coming anytime soon. Assuming the merger doesn't happen which is very likely from what I hear, maybe AA could go daily year round with a 767 which should be the perfect capacity.


User currently offlinewilliam From United States of America, joined Jun 1999, 1317 posts, RR: 0
Reply 97, posted (1 year 2 months 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 14766 times:

I remember the construction from the late 80s, when T2 was United's home and T1 was under construction. UA used a temporary building as concourse that snaked around the T1 construction (terminal of tomorrow). But T2...man, its loke stepping into a Mad Men time warp, pretty cool. Yeah T2 is old (do they still have the hard plastic chairs) but there is a lot of nostalgia there.

User currently offlineord2010 From United States of America, joined Sep 2013, 105 posts, RR: 0
Reply 98, posted (1 year 2 months 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 14760 times:

Did anyone notice the sudden upgrade in seats for the ORD-MUC flights? UA had dropped the 777 from the route and placed a 767 and LH operates it daily on a 330. Today I went to check the route again and UA went back to a daily 777 keeping BRU as a 777 as well and LH went from a 330 to a 346. Big jump up in seats all of a sudden to MUC, UA flies the 77 to the EU from ORD as much as to asia!

User currently offlineckfred From United States of America, joined Apr 2001, 5294 posts, RR: 1
Reply 99, posted (1 year 2 months 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 14576 times:

jayunited:

Excellent point. Richie Daley seemed more concerned with getting more domestic competition for ORD's two main tenants that doing what it good for them and good for Chicago in terms of making ORD easier to get to from around the globe. That's why the modernization plan went from the new terminals 4 and 6 to a western terminal.

Granted, the idea of a western terminal was put forth to get some suburbs to drop their oppositon to expansion. So, if the City switched from the western terminal back to the plan with Terminal 4 where the HVAC Building is and Terminal 6 to the east of Terminal 5, the suburbs would go balistic.

Yet, the last plan I saw for connecting passengers between the western terminal and the other four terminals involved busses travleing on York Rd, Thorndale Ave., Mannheim Rd., and I-190. Imagine how long that would take during the evening rush.

No one has yet explained how passengers, bags, mail, and cargo would be shuttled between the western terminal and the current 4 terminals, which is why I don't think a terminal on the west side of the field makes sense.

Quoting jetblastdubai (Reply 77):
As thekennady indicated, 32L is the biggest obstacle blocking western expansion however 4L is also a big issue. I worked ORD for 18+ years and only saw arrivals on 4L twice so it's not worth considering it. Arrivals on 22R would definitely be an issue for any terminals west of the C concourse. Fortunately, with the new parallels, 22R would technically never be needed for arrivals unless the winds were so strong out of the south that none of the E/W runways could be used but then again, if only 22L and 22R were available for operations, the airport would be in meltdown mode anyway. 4L/22R could be removed from the 'available runway' list. Dig it up but leave the portion that would be a nice high-speed exit for 27L. (where it joins txy R)

The current modernization plan calls for 4L/22R and 4R/22L to remain. Having lived in Chicagoland for 51 years, the gusty winds tend to be out of the north and northwest from late fall to mid spring, and from the south and southwest in mid spring to late summer. Going to a configuration like ATL, solely east-west runways, would open a lot of space for terminal expansion, but would present problems on days with really gusty winds.

I think it was back in 2004, when I was flying ORD-LGA. Winds were out of the southeast at 30 gusting to 45, and 22L was being used for both arrivals and departures. That is very, very unusual.

Quoting jetblastdubai (Reply 77):
Looks like you put a lot of thought into the airport redesign but I've got to throw some cold water on it right off the bat...sorry. The terminal north of T3 (L gates) cannot ever be built because you would have to remove and relocate the airports heating/cooling plant and that simply will not happen.

The plan to turn T2 into the Star terminal and a new T4 as the oneworld terminal called for the demolition of the HVAC building. I'm not sure where they were going to build a new HVAC building and connect the pipes to all of the terminals, but that was the plan. Some architecture enthusiasts weren't happy, because the HVAC building is a good example of Bauhaus/International Style arichtecture, with the insides of the building fully exposed by the glass curtain walls.


User currently offlineCIDFlyer From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 2351 posts, RR: 3
Reply 100, posted (1 year 2 months 1 day 2 hours ago) and read 14542 times:

Quoting HermansCVR580 (Reply 85):
How about this?

http://i158.photobucket.com/albums/t100/raether916/ohare.jpg

now that would be AWESOME! an ATL/DEN type layout. Could have an underground train/walkway to connect to all concourses.


User currently offlinethekennady From United States of America, joined Nov 2008, 394 posts, RR: 0
Reply 101, posted (1 year 2 months 1 day 2 hours ago) and read 14483 times:

Quoting CIDFlyer (Reply 100):

Would not even need a train or walkway besides the 2 far west concourses. The rest of the airport would still be reached easilly from the check in/security areas on foot. Would still be set up nice for the O&D passenger and the connecting passenger.


User currently offlinejetblastdubai From United States of America, joined Aug 2013, 768 posts, RR: 0
Reply 102, posted (1 year 2 months 1 day 2 hours ago) and read 14511 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting ckfred (Reply 99):
Going to a configuration like ATL, solely east-west runways, would open a lot of space for terminal expansion, but would present problems on days with really gusty winds.

We brought up this situation many times in discussions/meetings about airport expansion. It is very rare for ORD not to use one of more of the current east/west runways in almost every runway configuration. During those very few days when the winds are so strong directly out of the south or north, then yeah the airport comes to a standstill. In fact, just about every runway is used in every approach configuration until the winds get above the 25kts range or when aircraft reach their crosswind component limitation.

They could redesign ORD to be as efficient as possible 98% of the time OR they could try to redesign it so that the airport would never totally shut down due to wind direction/velocity but sacrifice a little efficiency during the remaining 98% of the time that there would be normal ops. Keep in mind, there will still be thunderstorm days where no matter how many usable runways ORD has, no one is going to be flying. They'll still be blizzard days when braking action goes to zero that will stop all operations. Halting operations due to the short periods when no suitable runway is available due to wind wouldn't be the end of the world.



A good landing is one you can walk away from. A great landing is when you can re-use the aircraft.
User currently onlinemayor From United States of America, joined Mar 2008, 10600 posts, RR: 14
Reply 103, posted (1 year 2 months 23 hours ago) and read 14413 times:

Quoting jetblastdubai (Reply 102):

When I worked at ORD in the 70s and Jane Byrne was Mayor, supposedly one of those winter storms that closed the airport was the FIRST time ORD had been closed for those reasons since it was opened.......this and the poor job of plowing the city streets didn't help her election chances very much.



"A committee is a group of the unprepared, appointed by the unwilling, to do the unnecessary"----Fred Allen
User currently offlinejcwr56 From United States of America, joined Jul 2012, 539 posts, RR: 1
Reply 104, posted (1 year 2 months 15 hours ago) and read 14303 times:

Quoting mayor (Reply 103):
When I worked at ORD in the 70s and Jane Byrne was Mayor, supposedly one of those winter storms that closed the airport was the FIRST time ORD had been closed for those reasons since it was opened.......this and the poor job of plowing the city streets didn't help her election chances very much.

Exactly and why now you'll never see ORD close again outside of a major aircraft incident. During any snow event, there is at least one runway open at all times. It's amazing when people think since no flights are taking off and landing the airports closed, it's not.

While this has thread has turned into a lovefest (not that it's a bad thing) a quick recap shows ORD has 10/28C opening on 17OCT, LH finally bringing in their 748i on 27OCT, Volaris starting daily MEX service 16DEC. Also, we get submissions for the IATA SC by 10OCT which will show if anything new is planned and how the rumors will pan out or not.

Of course there's the ongoing revamp of T5, various ramp concrete replacements in the domestic core, the buildout of the northcargo ramp, the consolidated car rental facility and purchase of additional ATS cars, groundwork for 10/28L and the new southern tower ( both 2015 opening), completion of taxiway LL on the western side of the airport, ongoing review of signage and planned revamp to make it more user friendly, the extension of Balmoral ave over Mannheim road to meet up at Bessie Coleman and current widening of Mannheim from I190 to Higgins.

There's plenty for "What's Next".....


User currently offlinejsnww81 From United States of America, joined Jan 2002, 2051 posts, RR: 15
Reply 105, posted (1 year 2 months 13 hours ago) and read 14231 times:

Quoting jcwr56 (Reply 104):
the extension of Balmoral ave over Mannheim road to meet up at Bessie Coleman and current widening of Mannheim from I190 to Higgins.

I would love to see them reconfigure the lanes on I-190 eastbound at Mannheim to eliminate the horrible bottleneck that the lane reduction there causes. When they rebuilt the Mannheim bridge 7 or 8 years ago, I couldn't believe they didn't fix this. There's enough room to add an extra lane, even with the CTA tracks running under the bridge as well.


User currently offlineord2010 From United States of America, joined Sep 2013, 105 posts, RR: 0
Reply 106, posted (1 year 2 months 4 hours ago) and read 14042 times:

Quoting jcwr56 (Reply 104):
While this has thread has turned into a lovefest (not that it's a bad thing) a quick recap shows ORD has 10/28C opening on 17OCT, LH finally bringing in their 748i on 27OCT, Volaris starting daily MEX service 16DEC. Also, we get submissions for the IATA SC by 10OCT which will show if anything new is planned and how the rumors will pan out or not.

I was not aware volaris was starting ORD daily, seems odd since they already serve MDW to a lot of mexico daily, you sure? Love that the 748 is coming finally, want to see more of her and the 787 at ORD from UA especially! Do you know anything that might be submitted to the IATA? and what is your insight on what is next route wise?


User currently offlinesteex From United States of America, joined Jun 2007, 1731 posts, RR: 9
Reply 107, posted (1 year 2 months 4 hours ago) and read 14003 times:

Quoting jsnww81 (Reply 105):
I would love to see them reconfigure the lanes on I-190 eastbound at Mannheim to eliminate the horrible bottleneck that the lane reduction there causes. When they rebuilt the Mannheim bridge 7 or 8 years ago, I couldn't believe they didn't fix this. There's enough room to add an extra lane, even with the CTA tracks running under the bridge as well.

There isn't enough room to get an additional lane under the railroad viaduct immediately east of Mannheim without eliminating the entrance ramp from NB Mannheim. Having zero merge room for the NB Mannheim ramp would not only sap away most of the capacity "benefit" of widening I-190 under Mannheim, it would also be considerably less safe.


User currently offlineairplanedaj From United States of America, joined Aug 2013, 114 posts, RR: 0
Reply 108, posted (1 year 1 month 4 weeks 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 13884 times:

This is the official master plan for ORD. Taken directly from the City of Chicago's page.
http://www.ohare.com/MasterPlan/Appendix%20E%20-%205.pdf

The new West Terminal complex is going to be great for people from the West and Northwest of ORD, as we won't have to drive by the airport to get to it. M will also add a new section, as some posters have already diagrammed.

My personal belief is that AA and Oneworld will take over the new West Terminal, while UA and Star will take over all of T2 and Conc. G. Both T1 and the new West Term. will have Customs/FIS that are fully capable of handling numerous aircraft. The new M extension will have at least 2-3 A380 capable gates, with the rest dual jetway gates. This way they can also close small sections of the current M as needed for refurbishment.


User currently offlinethekennady From United States of America, joined Nov 2008, 394 posts, RR: 0
Reply 109, posted (1 year 1 month 4 weeks 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 13768 times:

Quoting jcwr56 (Reply 104):

Have not heard anything about Volaris, You know better than us though. Another thing, why did AM connect withdraw from ORD? They used to fly a few places, What happened?


User currently offlinejcwr56 From United States of America, joined Jul 2012, 539 posts, RR: 1
Reply 110, posted (1 year 1 month 4 weeks 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 13758 times:

Quoting ord2010 (Reply 106):
I was not aware volaris was starting ORD daily, seems odd since they already serve MDW to a lot of mexico daily, you sure? Love that the 748 is coming finally, want to see more of her and the 787 at ORD from UA especially! Do you know anything that might be submitted to the IATA? and what is your insight on what is next route wise?

Positive on Volaris, I have their schedule in front of me. There's talk this could be a test to see how ORD goes and if it does well, they'll look to move their entire operation from MDW to ORD. The MEX flight is timed to directly compete with AM.

As far as IATA, I'm aware of several things but really can't say at this time. Something could be announced at the Routes conference in LAS next month, but like i mentioned previously, I believe most will wait until after IATA to see what times they end up with.

My personal and professional insight are the same, but I need to defer on saying what they are.


User currently offlineord2010 From United States of America, joined Sep 2013, 105 posts, RR: 0
Reply 111, posted (1 year 1 month 4 weeks 1 day 13 hours ago) and read 13648 times:

Quoting jcwr56 (Reply 110):
Positive on Volaris, I have their schedule in front of me. There's talk this could be a test to see how ORD goes and if it does well, they'll look to move their entire operation from MDW to ORD. The MEX flight is timed to directly compete with AM.

As far as IATA, I'm aware of several things but really can't say at this time. Something could be announced at the Routes conference in LAS next month, but like i mentioned previously, I believe most will wait until after IATA to see what times they end up with.

My personal and professional insight are the same, but I need to defer on saying what they are.

as far as the IATA submissions the october 10 date is just for ORD? as for the routes forum, it will be held in Chicago in 2014, do you know if this event in any way will be open to the general public? I'd love to go as i'm already heading to chicago for the AIA convention in june (big year in events for the city.) but I think routes is a closed event. are routes normally announced at this convention.


User currently offlinejcwr56 From United States of America, joined Jul 2012, 539 posts, RR: 1
Reply 112, posted (1 year 1 month 4 weeks 1 day 12 hours ago) and read 13595 times:

Quoting ord2010 (Reply 111):
as far as the IATA submissions the october 10 date is just for ORD?

No, it's Industry wide.

Routes I think is closed to the public. I've never attended one but I'll probably go next year.


User currently offlineord2010 From United States of America, joined Sep 2013, 105 posts, RR: 0
Reply 113, posted (1 year 1 month 4 weeks 1 day 12 hours ago) and read 13571 times:

Quoting jcwr56 (Reply 112):
No, it's Industry wide.

Routes I think is closed to the public. I've never attended one but I'll probably go next year.

Do you happen to know how the loads on the HU,OS,QR,AB flights are? and the NH twice dailies to NRT? Sorry to ask all of this, but you seem to be very knowledgable on ORD, lots of things I'd like to know, as well as how is T5 looking?


User currently offlinewilliam From United States of America, joined Jun 1999, 1317 posts, RR: 0
Reply 114, posted (1 year 1 month 4 weeks 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 13507 times:

After buidling new terminals at JFK,MIA and refurbishing DFW, I am not sure AA would be in the mood to build the west terminal complex. Due to the age of T3,it would make sense for AA to move, and it would allow ORD to tear down T2 and T3 and rebuild them in the same vein as T1.

Aesthetically ORD looks like two airports, T1 and then the rest.


User currently offlinejcwr56 From United States of America, joined Jul 2012, 539 posts, RR: 1
Reply 115, posted (1 year 1 month 4 weeks 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 13490 times:

Quoting ord2010 (Reply 113):

Loads on the above have been solid. HU really want the 787 operating now, but they're willing to use the 346 until November. The 2nd NH flight doesn't offer any connections on the arrival into NRT but overall, they have been pleased with the flight. I wouldn't be shocked if you see JL look at a 2nd daily.

T5, it received a new fresh coat of paint this summer. A new roof is planned in the spring with 400Hz and PCA upgrades in the process to handle the newer aircraft. There's talk of reinstalling the 2nd domestic claim to handle additional precleared flights ( TBA) and any domestic flights that will use the facility.

You can finally see the new southern tower rising above the SW cargo buildings if you haven't passed through recently.

There's more for the airport but it's like the mail, it never stops.

[Edited 2013-09-27 10:38:10]

User currently offlineHermansCVR580 From United States of America, joined Jul 1999, 510 posts, RR: 1
Reply 116, posted (1 year 1 month 4 weeks 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 13480 times:

So I have to ask jcwr56 are with the Chicago Department of Aviation? Or something similar? You have some great insight as to the happenings in and around ORD, very informative that is for sure 


The right decision at the wrong time, is still a wrong decision. "Hal Carr"
User currently offlinejcwr56 From United States of America, joined Jul 2012, 539 posts, RR: 1
Reply 117, posted (1 year 1 month 4 weeks 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 13449 times:

Quoting HermansCVR580 (Reply 116):

Guys, just enjoy the information I provide and leave it at that.


User currently offlineord2010 From United States of America, joined Sep 2013, 105 posts, RR: 0
Reply 118, posted (1 year 1 month 4 weeks 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 13424 times:

Quoting jcwr56 (Reply 117):
Quoting HermansCVR580 (Reply 116):

Guys, just enjoy the information I provide and leave it at that.

Thats a very if I tell you I'd have to kill you answer. I'm gonna guess you work for the CDA.

Question to help my understanding of terminal design, How would pax entering T5 as a pre-cleared flight exit the post security area without having to go through the immigration area? And how do they keep pax that do have to clear immigration form going into the pre cleared area, unless they cut off access to that part of the terminal so pre cleared have their own are, sorry if it is a stupid question.

Hows the retail redevelopment of T5, and the restaurant additions? is it the revolutionary redevelopment promised by westfield?

So what I get from your reply's is that we will be seeing a good 2014 with new pre cleared flights (UK, Canada?) and some new long haul internationals. and perhaps yet another NRT frequency? could we maybe see a flight to HND?


User currently offlineord2010 From United States of America, joined Sep 2013, 105 posts, RR: 0
Reply 119, posted (1 year 1 month 4 weeks 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 13414 times:

Quoting jcwr56 (Reply 117):
Guys, just enjoy the information I provide and leave it at that.

And would you be able to tell us on OCT 10 what was submitted for ORD? So we can know before anything is announced/


User currently offlinejcwr56 From United States of America, joined Jul 2012, 539 posts, RR: 1
Reply 120, posted (1 year 1 month 4 weeks 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 13355 times:

Quoting ord2010 (Reply 119):
And would you be able to tell us on OCT 10 what was submitted for ORD? So we can know before anything is announced/

No, I wouldn't....

I feel like I'm playing "What's my Line"....(That should date me).

Quoting ord2010 (Reply 118):
Question to help my understanding of terminal design, How would pax entering T5 as a pre-cleared flight exit the post security area without having to go through the immigration area? And how do they keep pax that do have to clear immigration form going into the pre cleared area, unless they cut off access to that part of the terminal so pre cleared have their own are, sorry if it is a stupid question.

Precleared are just deplaned on the departures level instead of going downstairs to immigration. I.E., EI uses M5, so they just walk 75' on the departures level where there's an escalator that takes them down to the domestic claim #10. (Lower arrivals area) . Those that connect never see their bags and those staying locally take them and go on their way. In theory, any gate can be used as a domestic arrival, but logisitically people would go against the flow coming from the center of the build.

Quoting ord2010 (Reply 118):
Hows the retail redevelopment of T5, and the restaurant additions? is it the revolutionary redevelopment promised by westfield?

Highly received by passengers so far. Tocco is the next restaurant planned to open on 02OCT. They've started with the prep work for the restaurant to built over the ATS platform at T5. Westfield has really outdone themselves to what was here before.


User currently offlineairplanedaj From United States of America, joined Aug 2013, 114 posts, RR: 0
Reply 121, posted (1 year 1 month 4 weeks 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 13355 times:

Quoting william (Reply 114):

After buidling new terminals at JFK,MIA and refurbishing DFW, I am not sure AA would be in the mood to build the west terminal complex.

My thinking was kinda opposite of yours. I think that AA has put in an investment to building new hub terminals for themselves. AA would not be the only one paying for the West Terminal, but what percentage would be put up by AA (or whoever else decides to build it) is unclear. As an AA fanboy, I hope they take the City up on the West Terminal


User currently offlineord2010 From United States of America, joined Sep 2013, 105 posts, RR: 0
Reply 122, posted (1 year 1 month 4 weeks 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 13313 times:

Quoting jcwr56 (Reply 120):
Quoting ord2010 (Reply 119):
And would you be able to tell us on OCT 10 what was submitted for ORD? So we can know before anything is announced/

No, I wouldn't....

I feel like I'm playing "What's my Line"....(That should date me).

How about the amount of routes submitted? (as you can see I'm trying to get out what I can of you that is allowed haha.)

Quoting jcwr56 (Reply 120):
Highly received by passengers so far. Tocco is the next restaurant planned to open on 02OCT. They've started with the prep work for the restaurant to built over the ATS platform at T5. Westfield has really outdone themselves to what was here before.

What airport would you compare the new T5 to? and how are the lounges now?

Quoting airplanedaj (Reply 121):

Quoting william (Reply 114):

After buidling new terminals at JFK,MIA and refurbishing DFW, I am not sure AA would be in the mood to build the west terminal complex.

My thinking was kinda opposite of yours. I think that AA has put in an investment to building new hub terminals for themselves. AA would not be the only one paying for the West Terminal, but what percentage would be put up by AA (or whoever else decides to build it) is unclear. As an AA fanboy, I hope they take the City up on the West Terminal

To be perfectly honest with you, the MIA work wasn't a full reconstruct just a lot of renovations but it is still nothing to toot my horn for flying with OW partners out of MIA a lot, I rather use the EWR UA terminal in my honest opinion. So I hope AA isn't in charge of influencing the design because we will be looking at a boring new terminal, but it would be nice to see AA using it along OW and new OW carriers.


User currently offlineAmricanShamrok From Ireland, joined May 2008, 2977 posts, RR: 0
Reply 123, posted (1 year 1 month 4 weeks 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 13284 times:

Quoting EaglePower83 (Reply 82):
There are Domestic/International airside shuttles too.

Where is the pick-up/drop-off point at T5 for these shuttles? Do they run frequently?

Quoting jcwr56 (Reply 115):
There's talk of reinstalling the 2nd domestic claim to handle additional precleared flights

Where had the second domestic baggage carousel been located prior to closure?



Shannon-Chicago
User currently offlinejcwr56 From United States of America, joined Jul 2012, 539 posts, RR: 1
Reply 124, posted (1 year 1 month 4 weeks 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 13239 times:

Quoting AmricanShamrok (Reply 123):
Quoting jcwr56 (Reply 115):There's talk of reinstalling the 2nd domestic claim to handle additional precleared flights.

Where had the second domestic baggage carousel been located prior to closure?

Next to Claim 10 on the lower level near Exit A from Customs. If you're facing Exit A, it's to the right of it. There's currently some TSA office space that was built.


User currently offlineord2010 From United States of America, joined Sep 2013, 105 posts, RR: 0
Reply 125, posted (1 year 1 month 4 weeks 1 day ago) and read 13104 times:

I was just reading the new booklet of the year ORD has had in 2012 and 2013 and it is awesome! A lot of exciting things and good breakdown of the modernization project which to them includes a T5 expansion and new western terminal as well, here's a snapshot from the online PDF:
ORD3


Looks absolutely awesome and congrats to Midway on it's busiest year ever since opening! And long live new expansions from ORD to the rest of the world! Does anyone know where I can get my hands on one of these booklets? I would love to add it to my collection. Here is the link to the PDF: http://www.flychicago.com/SiteCollec...20very%20low%20res%209-12-2013.pdf


User currently offlinejetblastdubai From United States of America, joined Aug 2013, 768 posts, RR: 0
Reply 126, posted (1 year 1 month 4 weeks 14 hours ago) and read 12905 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting ord2010 (Reply 125):
I was just reading the new booklet of the year ORD has had in 2012 and 2013 and it is awesome!

This is the same airport layout plan that came out years ago and it screams "runway incursion potential". Having worked at ORD as well as the runway incursion capitals of LAX and DXB, I can see where the 'hot spots' will be and there are many of them in this proposal. There are far too many runway crossing points on 27L and 27C and the high-speed exits that transition into perpendicular crossing taxiways near the center of 27L are especially confusing to unfamiliar pilots.

DXB had to close taxiway M10 because there were a rash of flight crews that got 'lost' while exiting 12L and ended up crossing 12R. DXB even has selectable, flush--mounted red runway stop bars lights and the crews still ended up crossing them.

Mid-field runway incursions have far more potential for catastrophic outcomes as opposed to conflicts at the approach or departure ends of runways.

There are no routes to/from the hangars without crossing 9C/R and that's a huge issue. Not only are crossings difficult with towing aircraft, but if the plan is to cross at the far west end, there will be issues with the glide slope critical areas on 9C/R as well as localizer critical areas on 27L/C in IFR weather. This configuration involves two runways crossings as well. Yikes.



A good landing is one you can walk away from. A great landing is when you can re-use the aircraft.
User currently offlinethekennady From United States of America, joined Nov 2008, 394 posts, RR: 0
Reply 127, posted (1 year 1 month 4 weeks 9 hours ago) and read 12771 times:

Quoting jcwr56 (Reply 110):

I see Volaris is listed now but no times. Have any info on the times? Also, do u know why AA is reducing NRT to 5 times weekly? Did AM connect withdraw from ORD completely? Maybe Volaris sees a opportunity because of this?


User currently offlinejcwr56 From United States of America, joined Jul 2012, 539 posts, RR: 1
Reply 128, posted (1 year 1 month 4 weeks 7 hours ago) and read 12714 times:

Quoting thekennady (Reply 127):
I see Volaris is listed now but no times. Have any info on the times? Also, do u know why AA is reducing NRT to 5 times weekly? Did AM connect withdraw from ORD completely? Maybe Volaris sees a opportunity because of this?

I have times, 1250-1408. AM connect will be back too. I haven't asked about the reduction, but I can find out if it's that important.


User currently offlinethekennady From United States of America, joined Nov 2008, 394 posts, RR: 0
Reply 129, posted (1 year 1 month 4 weeks 7 hours ago) and read 12689 times:

Quoting jcwr56 (Reply 128):

Thx, good AM connect is coming back. I was wondering about AA because it suprised me they were reducing weekly flights on a highly competitive route, JL is still daily but the AA reduction was not expected.


User currently offlineord2010 From United States of America, joined Sep 2013, 105 posts, RR: 0
Reply 130, posted (1 year 1 month 4 weeks 4 hours ago) and read 12584 times:

Quoting thekennady (Reply 129):
Thx, good AM connect is coming back. I was wondering about AA because it suprised me they were reducing weekly flights on a highly competitive route, JL is still daily but the AA reduction was not expected.

I was surprised as well, with JL looking into a second daily, maybe it is gearing up to launch JL second daily, it would be awesome to see 6 daily ORD-NRT flights on 4 carriers and I think UA is bringing the 744 back on the NRT route soon. Where will AM connect fly to? As for wiki and Volaris I went ahead and updated that earlier this week.

Quoting jcwr56 (Reply 128):
I have times, 1250-1408. AM connect will be back too. I haven't asked about the reduction, but I can find out if it's that important.

It would be great to find out about why AA reduced, maybe it has to do with their loads? Any luck finding the loads of the new flights this year?


User currently offlinetimberwolf24 From United States of America, joined Jun 2001, 575 posts, RR: 1
Reply 131, posted (1 year 1 month 4 weeks 3 hours ago) and read 12502 times:

Might we see Ukraine International start IEV-ORD now that Ukraine is back to cat 1 status? Another long shot is SkyGreece to ATH if they actually start service.


Living in LA, ORD/MDW will always be home!
User currently offlineord2010 From United States of America, joined Sep 2013, 105 posts, RR: 0
Reply 132, posted (1 year 1 month 4 weeks 1 hour ago) and read 12425 times:

Quoting timberwolf24 (Reply 131):
Might we see Ukraine International start IEV-ORD now that Ukraine is back to cat 1 status? Another long shot is SkyGreece to ATH if they actually start service.

I believe Ukraine international was saying they want to launch ORD (Knowing a lot of Russians from Chicago personally, most of them are from Kiev actually!) and ATH would be a nice summer route on UA or year round on Skygreece, I'd be excited for IEV.


User currently offlinesteex From United States of America, joined Jun 2007, 1731 posts, RR: 9
Reply 133, posted (1 year 1 month 4 weeks ago) and read 12360 times:

Quoting timberwolf24 (Reply 131):
Might we see Ukraine International start IEV-ORD now that Ukraine is back to cat 1 status?

I'd say almost certainly not in the remotely near future. They have only a single longhaul aircraft presently (a 763) and have no TATL service. I think they have several fish to fry before ORD would happen, and that will take quite a long time. Also, minor correct, but any such route would operate out of KBP, not IEV.