Moderators: jsumali2, richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR

  • 1
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
 
User avatar
LOWS
Posts: 1335
Joined: Sun Oct 23, 2011 5:37 am

Re: ORD Expansion Deal - Update: AA Accuses City of Collusion w/ UA

Thu Mar 15, 2018 2:36 pm

9w748capt wrote:
Will the new global terminal have US Immigration/Customs facility? Or will all int'l arrivals still go to T5? I'm sure this has already been discussed so sorry to ask. Hopefully 25 years from now when this is done, we can be done with the PITA T5-T123 transfer process.


There will be a separate facility in T2 for UA/Star+AA/OW.
 
flyguy84
Posts: 770
Joined: Thu Dec 22, 2016 7:26 pm

Re: ORD Expansion Deal - Update: AA Accuses City of Collusion w/ UA

Thu Mar 15, 2018 2:42 pm

9w748capt wrote:
Will the new global terminal have US Immigration/Customs facility? Or will all int'l arrivals still go to T5? I'm sure this has already been discussed so sorry to ask. Hopefully 25 years from now when this is done, we can be done with the PITA T5-T123 transfer process.

What do you think “global” means.....
SFO
 
chicawgo
Posts: 447
Joined: Tue Nov 29, 2011 5:09 pm

Re: ORD Expansion Deal - Update: AA Accuses City of Collusion w/ UA

Thu Mar 15, 2018 2:48 pm

9w748capt wrote:
Will the new global terminal have US Immigration/Customs facility? Or will all int'l arrivals still go to T5? I'm sure this has already been discussed so sorry to ask. Hopefully 25 years from now when this is done, we can be done with the PITA T5-T123 transfer process.


Yes there will be 2 CBP facilities at ORD. And it’s scheduled to be finished in 2026 so hopefully won’t have to wait 25 years.
 
9w748capt
Posts: 1770
Joined: Sat Feb 02, 2008 10:27 am

Re: ORD Expansion Deal - Update: AA Accuses City of Collusion w/ UA

Thu Mar 15, 2018 3:23 pm

flyguy84 wrote:
9w748capt wrote:
Will the new global terminal have US Immigration/Customs facility? Or will all int'l arrivals still go to T5? I'm sure this has already been discussed so sorry to ask. Hopefully 25 years from now when this is done, we can be done with the PITA T5-T123 transfer process.

What do you think “global” means.....


No idea! Should I buy a dictionary?
 
User avatar
United787
Posts: 2943
Joined: Fri May 20, 2005 12:20 pm

Re: ORD Expansion Deal - Update: AA Accuses City of Collusion w/ UA

Thu Mar 15, 2018 3:29 pm

9w748capt wrote:
Will the new global terminal have US Immigration/Customs facility? Or will all int'l arrivals still go to T5? I'm sure this has already been discussed so sorry to ask. Hopefully 25 years from now when this is done, we can be done with the PITA T5-T123 transfer process.


The new T2 will handle Star Alliance/One World arrivals and departures so yes, it will have an FIS facility.

BUT, it is unclear from the documents issued so far if it is just AA/UA and their "core" partners (AC, LH, NH, OZ, BA, IB, JL, CX) as the diagram above suggests... or all of their alliance partners. I hope it is the later.
 
muralir
Posts: 129
Joined: Mon May 27, 2013 3:44 pm

Re: ORD Expansion Deal - Update: AA Accuses City of Collusion w/ UA

Thu Mar 15, 2018 3:34 pm

ual763 wrote:
I believe the train repair station/steam plant, or whatever it is, will be moved. It is extremely hard to see from the picture, but if you zoom in, you can just barely make out the parking for Air Choice One, at the end of L.
Image


I seriously doubt they'll move the steam plant. That's the central heating plant for the entire airport and would entail a ton of construction to redirect pipes, etc. But if they do, it won't be for a few regional air gates. It would be for a brand new terminal (4?). There's always been speculation of relocating that central plant and building a T4, but the fact that it hasn't been done, and that in the new plan, it's cheaper to rebuild T2 and expand T5, I think kinda shows just how expensive moving that plant would be...
 
muralir
Posts: 129
Joined: Mon May 27, 2013 3:44 pm

Re: ORD Expansion Deal - Update: AA Accuses City of Collusion w/ UA

Thu Mar 15, 2018 3:45 pm

Matt6461 wrote:
I still lean toward my original position. Regulators could ensure adequate competition from WN, Spirit, Frontier, Alaska, JetBlue by capping UA at say 60% of gates. On small regional feeder routes where no LCC flies, the ability to run small mainline service instead of 2 carriers flying RJ's would probably mean a lower price point than in the current competitive dynamic. UA would expand its international and domestic service from ORD, which would be good for the flying public even if prices were 10% higher than in a 2-carrier market. ATL sees service to points that their regional economy wouldn't justify, absent DL's megahub. Chicago would become a dominant 1-stop point for western U.S.-Europe/ME, and for Eastern U.S.-Asia.


I disagree. Yes, the cost *to the airline* of running one mainline vs 2 RJs is lower. But the price they set for us, their customers, isn't based on their cost, it's based on what the market will bear. If there's less competition, that price will be higher, and the airline will pocket a higher profit. I don't begrudge the airlines earning money, but if it's due to monopoly practices, then it's not good.

Also, I think the vast majority of flyers would rather take a 10% discount on the regular, boring flights they take every week, in exchange for having to connect somewhere for that once-in-a-lifetime flight to some exotic, obscure locale. Of course, it would be great to have both (in many respects we do; O'hare has often been rated #1 in number of cities connected, and it's astounding how much international connectivity we have to both Asia and Europe considering we're not on either coast). But I for one would happily trade a direct flight to Lagos, Nigeria in exchange for a 10% discount to SF, LA, NYC, and DC.
 
User avatar
kngkyle
Posts: 507
Joined: Wed Dec 27, 2006 3:33 am

Re: ORD Expansion Deal - Update: AA Now Onboard

Thu Mar 15, 2018 3:45 pm

Basically AA got nothing for their hissy fit and caved once they realized Emanuel was not backing down. The "accelerated schedule" for their already planned 3 gate addition to L sounds to me like a face-saving "concession" by the city, especially considering no schedule that detailed was ever made public to begin with.

It's good that all parties are now on board. Now let's see if the city can actually pull all of this off by 2026.
 
Kbud
Posts: 42
Joined: Mon Dec 05, 2016 3:18 am

Re: ORD Expansion Deal - Update: AA Accuses City of Collusion w/ UA

Thu Mar 15, 2018 4:07 pm

United787 wrote:
Does anyone know where these 3 gates are going? Is there room at the end of the existing L concourse to have planes park on the end? Or would this be 3 more gates at the end of the L Stinger concourse? If the Stinger, would the stinger make an L and head north for 3 gates?

YouGeeElWhy wrote:
Now that we are moving forward, who will be more impacted by the construction, AA or UA?


I would imagine that at no point during construction would AA, UA or any airline lose any gates, so no net loss. But, for AA, does that mean before or after their 5 new gates?

The sequencing of this will be interesting. I would imagine it would go like this:

1) T5 expansion begins construction
2) Closure and demolition of 14R/32L
3) T1C concourse expansion and new T1D concourse begin construction
4) T5, T1C and T1D construction complete
5) UA express and AC moves from T2E/T2F to T1C/T1D
6) DL moves from T2E to T5
7) 3E, AS (VX), 9K, F9, B6, NK move from T2 to T5
8) T2, E & F begin demolition
9) UA and AA still use T5 for international arrivals
10) UA starts renovation of old T2 complex closing sections at a time
11) AA takes over all of T3, G, H, K & L but starts renovation of entire T3 complex closing sections at a time
12) T2 begins construction
13) T2 completes construction
14) All of Star Alliance & One World move to T2


I've been thinking of this too. I don't know how T1C construction can begin until T2 is demolished or at least the "E" finger.
1) For a plan this size, I sure hope it is 2025. But knowing how long it takes to do things in Chicago and that it will take a lot of time until T2 can start, 2025 seems aggressive :)
2) This plan also means that there will be no extra capacity for int'l arrivals/departures at T5 or additional widebody gates until 2025; Chicago is late to the party.
 
chicawgo
Posts: 447
Joined: Tue Nov 29, 2011 5:09 pm

Re: ORD Expansion Deal - Update: AA Accuses City of Collusion w/ UA

Thu Mar 15, 2018 4:47 pm

Kbud wrote:
1) For a plan this size, I sure hope it is 2025. But knowing how long it takes to do things in Chicago and that it will take a lot of time until T2 can start, 2025 seems aggressive :)


Agreed it's aggressive but, for their part, Chicago has done an amazing job with the ORD modernization so far... All runways delivered early and under budget. So hopefully they'll be able to keep that going for the terminals.
 
jbs2886
Posts: 2566
Joined: Wed Apr 01, 2015 9:07 pm

Re: ORD Expansion Deal - Update: AA Now Onboard

Thu Mar 15, 2018 4:56 pm

I didn't see this mentioned, but the 3 new gates will not be exclusive to AA; however, AA is stating that while the gates are common use, they only fit aircraft used by AA that would use common use gates (read: E-175s) .
 
User avatar
jscottwomack
Posts: 45
Joined: Tue Jun 14, 2016 8:44 pm

Re: ORD Expansion Deal - Update: AA Accuses City of Collusion w/ UA

Thu Mar 15, 2018 5:08 pm

Kbud wrote:
United787 wrote:
Does anyone know where these 3 gates are going? Is there room at the end of the existing L concourse to have planes park on the end? Or would this be 3 more gates at the end of the L Stinger concourse? If the Stinger, would the stinger make an L and head north for 3 gates?

YouGeeElWhy wrote:
Now that we are moving forward, who will be more impacted by the construction, AA or UA?


I would imagine that at no point during construction would AA, UA or any airline lose any gates, so no net loss. But, for AA, does that mean before or after their 5 new gates?

The sequencing of this will be interesting. I would imagine it would go like this:

1) T5 expansion begins construction
2) Closure and demolition of 14R/32L
3) T1C concourse expansion and new T1D concourse begin construction
4) T5, T1C and T1D construction complete
5) UA express and AC moves from T2E/T2F to T1C/T1D
6) DL moves from T2E to T5
7) 3E, AS (VX), 9K, F9, B6, NK move from T2 to T5
8) T2, E & F begin demolition
9) UA and AA still use T5 for international arrivals
10) UA starts renovation of old T2 complex closing sections at a time
11) AA takes over all of T3, G, H, K & L but starts renovation of entire T3 complex closing sections at a time
12) T2 begins construction
13) T2 completes construction
14) All of Star Alliance & One World move to T2


I've been thinking of this too. I don't know how T1C construction can begin until T2 is demolished or at least the "E" finger.
1) For a plan this size, I sure hope it is 2025. But knowing how long it takes to do things in Chicago and that it will take a lot of time until T2 can start, 2025 seems aggressive :)
2) This plan also means that there will be no extra capacity for int'l arrivals/departures at T5 or additional widebody gates until 2025; Chicago is late to the party.



T1C will be an extension. Easy add on. There is already an Existing walk tunnel between the B & C Gates that will get even busier. The new tunnel from the Expansion T1C to T2 will probably be one of the last things to open as that work can't start till they tear down T2. United will need the new Gates in T1C & T1D to make everything happen. That is the Domino that needs to fall to get the ball rolling.
TWA, Ozark, Braniff, Piedmont, USAir, American, Delta, Frontier, Midwest Express, Western, Eastern, Southwest, Northwest, PanAm, United, Mississippi Valley, Britt, Continental, Trans America, Midway, America West, National, American Trans Air, Sun Country
 
AA333PHL
Posts: 28
Joined: Fri Jul 25, 2014 2:58 am

Re: ORD Expansion Deal - Update: AA Now Onboard

Thu Mar 15, 2018 5:38 pm

According to the proposed global terminal map, there are more than 8 gates at the facility. Is United/SA receiving all of the gates on the west pier? Will American/OW use the 3 gates closest to the current concourse G?
 
User avatar
Matt6461
Posts: 2991
Joined: Wed Oct 16, 2013 9:36 pm

Re: ORD Expansion Deal - Update: AA Now Onboard

Thu Mar 15, 2018 6:23 pm

muralir wrote:
I disagree. Yes, the cost *to the airline* of running one mainline vs 2 RJs is lower. But the price they set for us, their customers, isn't based on their cost, it's based on what the market will bear. If there's less competition, that price will be higher, and the airline will pocket a higher profit. I don't begrudge the airlines earning money, but if it's due to monopoly practices, then it's not good.


In both competition and monopoly, where a firms' profit maximization occurs depends on the slope of the cost curve and the demand curve. While it's true that the monopolist stops short of the cost/demand intersection and thereby is usually less efficient, in cases with inexhaustible economies of scale the monopolist will actually set a lower price than non-monopolistic competition because the price-impact of the monopolist's cost curve step-down exceeds its rent-seeking. These cases are called "natural monopolies."

There's debate in the economic literature about whether hub airlines qualify as natural monopolies. Like much of academic economics, that debate is largely irrelevant IMO. The point is that in many cases, monopolists with economies of scale will cut prices to maximize profit. With 3-4 MAX-7's on SPI instead 5-7 UA/AA RJ's, UA's marginal costs for added seats are low enough that it maximize profit by cutting prices a little to fill the cheap extra seats on MAX-7.

Plus current prices at regional airports like AZO are already maxed out on price because there's not REALLY a monopoly there: GRR is ~hr away and that's true for most small airports.

muralir wrote:
I for one would happily trade a direct flight to Lagos, Nigeria in exchange for a 10% discount to SF, LA, NYC, and DC.


Maybe I wasn't clear enough:

  • 1. Regulators can ensure domestic competition by allotting some substantial percentage of gates to LCC's. Say ~30% - that makes ORD way more competitive than DFW/ATL and other "fortress hubs" while still allowing UA to build economies of scale. (plus there's MDW)
  • 2. The 10% higher remark should have been explicitly aimed at RASM for new flights compared to current flights. So UA would have competition from foreign carriers on all big international routes, but economies of scale would it to fly new routes like Lagos and earn 10% higher RASM than it does on, say, ORD-CDG. Yes it's a monopoly on the point-point route but it's monopoly or nothing.
 
User avatar
piedmontf284000
Posts: 474
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2016 12:00 pm

Re: ORD Expansion Deal - Update: AA Now Onboard

Thu Mar 15, 2018 8:46 pm

In terms of the accelerated gates for AA, the city had originally planned to build the three gates starting in late 2021, after the city had moved an underground communications facility in that part of the airport. However, the city is working with AA and AT&T, who operates it and have agreed to move it, to do so much sooner, possibly starting early this fall. They city will probably cover the costs of moving the said underground facility. The three gates will be an addition to the current L concourse and it will be a very limited extension that will provide one gate on the north side and two on the south side.

jbs2886 wrote:
I didn't see this mentioned, but the 3 new gates will not be exclusive to AA; however, AA is stating that while the gates are common use, they only fit aircraft used by AA that would use common use gates (read: E-175s) .


I think this is very good possibility considering the amount of space they have for expansion of L.
 
User avatar
United787
Posts: 2943
Joined: Fri May 20, 2005 12:20 pm

Re: ORD Expansion Deal - Update: AA Accuses City of Collusion w/ UA

Thu Mar 15, 2018 9:42 pm

chicawgo wrote:
Kbud wrote:
1) For a plan this size, I sure hope it is 2025. But knowing how long it takes to do things in Chicago and that it will take a lot of time until T2 can start, 2025 seems aggressive :)


Agreed it's aggressive but, for their part, Chicago has done an amazing job with the ORD modernization so far... All runways delivered early and under budget. So hopefully they'll be able to keep that going for the terminals.


I agree. When you look at how things get done in Chicago when compared to the East Coast or Europe and maybe even California, I would say Chicago is pretty efficient and fast. OF course, this isn't China or the Middle East either where you can just ram things through...
 
ual763
Posts: 1027
Joined: Sun May 14, 2017 11:46 am

Re: ORD Expansion Deal - Update: AA Now Onboard

Thu Mar 15, 2018 9:53 pm

You know, I really wish the CDA would entertain us enthusiasts and build an official spotting park at ORD. Back when ORD opened for commercial traffic, there was a spotting deck in top of the T3 rotunda, I believe. If Ginger Evans really wants ORD to be not only the busiest, but "best", they should have this imo. Honestly, I've read industry articles on the benefits of spotters for airport management. After 9/11 security has obviously tightened, but today, airports across the country are embracing spotters with open arms. They are excellent free publicity among other things. This is my dream for ORD!
From flying to the NOTAM office
 
ORDfan
Posts: 669
Joined: Sat Jun 30, 2007 6:02 am

Re: ORD Expansion Deal - Update: AA Now Onboard

Fri Mar 16, 2018 1:17 am

Glad that AA finally came around and decided to be a good corporate citizen. I guess for a minute I thought they might be serious about decreasing service, but everyone on here was adamant that they would eventually balk and come back to the table. You guys called it.

I can now return AA to my roster and remove them from the banned-list.
 
DFW17L
Posts: 276
Joined: Fri Nov 20, 2015 2:53 am

Re: ORD Expansion Deal - Update: AA Now Onboard

Fri Mar 16, 2018 1:24 am

ORD? Only when I need segments to hit my FF thresholds.
 
ORDfan
Posts: 669
Joined: Sat Jun 30, 2007 6:02 am

Re: ORD Expansion Deal - Update: AA Now Onboard

Fri Mar 16, 2018 1:35 am

DFW17L wrote:
ORD? Only when I need segments to hit my FF thresholds.


No worries....79 million other people flying through it.
 
JHwk
Posts: 577
Joined: Wed Jan 30, 2013 2:11 am

Re: ORD Expansion Deal - Update: AA Accuses City of Collusion w/ UA

Fri Mar 16, 2018 2:18 am

muralir wrote:
I seriously doubt they'll move the steam plant.

IIRC the central plant had a major upgrade around 1995, so it might not be that hard to write it off now given the total scope of work. There are likely some major efficiency improvements that can be made given current conditions.
 
ual763
Posts: 1027
Joined: Sun May 14, 2017 11:46 am

Re: ORD Expansion Deal - Update: AA Accuses City of Collusion w/ UA

Fri Mar 16, 2018 2:29 am

JHwk wrote:
muralir wrote:
I seriously doubt they'll move the steam plant.

IIRC the central plant had a major upgrade around 1995, so it might not be that hard to write it off now given the total scope of work. There are likely some major efficiency improvements that can be made given current conditions.


This new flyer put out by the CDA also seems to confirm that the steam plant will be moved in favor of 3 new gates on the north side of the stinger pier. Look at the rendering in the flyer.

https://indd.adobe.com/view/280a32de-51 ... 51bef43c63
From flying to the NOTAM office
 
muralir
Posts: 129
Joined: Mon May 27, 2013 3:44 pm

Re: ORD Expansion Deal - Update: AA Accuses City of Collusion w/ UA

Fri Mar 16, 2018 4:35 am

Kbud wrote:
United787 wrote:
Does anyone know where these 3 gates are going? Is there room at the end of the existing L concourse to have planes park on the end? Or would this be 3 more gates at the end of the L Stinger concourse? If the Stinger, would the stinger make an L and head north for 3 gates?

YouGeeElWhy wrote:
Now that we are moving forward, who will be more impacted by the construction, AA or UA?


I would imagine that at no point during construction would AA, UA or any airline lose any gates, so no net loss. But, for AA, does that mean before or after their 5 new gates?

The sequencing of this will be interesting. I would imagine it would go like this:

1) T5 expansion begins construction
2) Closure and demolition of 14R/32L
3) T1C concourse expansion and new T1D concourse begin construction
4) T5, T1C and T1D construction complete
5) UA express and AC moves from T2E/T2F to T1C/T1D
6) DL moves from T2E to T5
7) 3E, AS (VX), 9K, F9, B6, NK move from T2 to T5
8) T2, E & F begin demolition
9) UA and AA still use T5 for international arrivals
10) UA starts renovation of old T2 complex closing sections at a time
11) AA takes over all of T3, G, H, K & L but starts renovation of entire T3 complex closing sections at a time
12) T2 begins construction
13) T2 completes construction
14) All of Star Alliance & One World move to T2


I've been thinking of this too. I don't know how T1C construction can begin until T2 is demolished or at least the "E" finger.
1) For a plan this size, I sure hope it is 2025. But knowing how long it takes to do things in Chicago and that it will take a lot of time until T2 can start, 2025 seems aggressive :)
2) This plan also means that there will be no extra capacity for int'l arrivals/departures at T5 or additional widebody gates until 2025; Chicago is late to the party.


It mainly depends on the budget, and how much they can finance in one go. Because this is essentially a 2 phase plan: T5 expansion, T1C expansion, new T1D, can all occur at once (if the funds are there). That allows T2 to be emptied and rebuilt (phase 2).

If they issue bonds slowly, then construction will be slow. If they issue large amounts of bonds at once, then you know they're planning on doing as much work simultaneously as possible, in which case, a 2025 goal for 2 phases (3.5 years each) is feasible. The Tribune reported that Rahm is planning for a $4 bil bond deal (out of the planned $8.5 bil total cost) which is a good indication they're planning to do ~half the work simultaneously.
 
Kbud
Posts: 42
Joined: Mon Dec 05, 2016 3:18 am

Re: ORD Expansion Deal - Update: AA Accuses City of Collusion w/ UA

Fri Mar 16, 2018 2:52 pm

ual763 wrote:
JHwk wrote:
muralir wrote:
I seriously doubt they'll move the steam plant.

IIRC the central plant had a major upgrade around 1995, so it might not be that hard to write it off now given the total scope of work. There are likely some major efficiency improvements that can be made given current conditions.


This new flyer put out by the CDA also seems to confirm that the steam plant will be moved in favor of 3 new gates on the north side of the stinger pier. Look at the rendering in the flyer.

https://indd.adobe.com/view/280a32de-51 ... 51bef43c63

Interesting that the image for the Terminal 5 expansion is a different layout on the east side versus the plan presented about a year ago. Instead of having 5 or 6 gates on both sides at the end of the concourse, it now shows that the added leg will go north.
 
User avatar
jscottwomack
Posts: 45
Joined: Tue Jun 14, 2016 8:44 pm

Re: ORD Expansion Deal - Update: AA Accuses City of Collusion w/ UA

Fri Mar 16, 2018 3:16 pm

ual763 wrote:
JHwk wrote:
muralir wrote:
I seriously doubt they'll move the steam plant.

IIRC the central plant had a major upgrade around 1995, so it might not be that hard to write it off now given the total scope of work. There are likely some major efficiency improvements that can be made given current conditions.


This new flyer put out by the CDA also seems to confirm that the steam plant will be moved in favor of 3 new gates on the north side of the stinger pier. Look at the rendering in the flyer.

https://indd.adobe.com/view/280a32de-51 ... 51bef43c63


Steam plant stays. You can see the condensers it in the rendering. The Snow Removal Equipment & Facilities that is just to the right (east) of the steam plant looks to be moving to make way for the apron for 3 gates.
TWA, Ozark, Braniff, Piedmont, USAir, American, Delta, Frontier, Midwest Express, Western, Eastern, Southwest, Northwest, PanAm, United, Mississippi Valley, Britt, Continental, Trans America, Midway, America West, National, American Trans Air, Sun Country
 
CHI787ORD
Posts: 817
Joined: Sat Jun 11, 2005 11:27 am

Re: ORD Expansion Deal - Update: AA Now Onboard

Fri Mar 16, 2018 3:28 pm

If the new Global Terminal is only 8-9 WB gates as shown in the flyer, seems like its probably like it will be just for AA and UA and their "core partners"
 
ual763
Posts: 1027
Joined: Sun May 14, 2017 11:46 am

Re: ORD Expansion Deal - Update: AA Accuses City of Collusion w/ UA

Fri Mar 16, 2018 3:29 pm

jscottwomack wrote:
ual763 wrote:
JHwk wrote:
IIRC the central plant had a major upgrade around 1995, so it might not be that hard to write it off now given the total scope of work. There are likely some major efficiency improvements that can be made given current conditions.


This new flyer put out by the CDA also seems to confirm that the steam plant will be moved in favor of 3 new gates on the north side of the stinger pier. Look at the rendering in the flyer.

https://indd.adobe.com/view/280a32de-51 ... 51bef43c63


Steam plant stays. You can see the condensers it in the rendering. The Snow Removal Equipment & Facilities that is just to the right (east) of the steam plant looks to be moving to make way for the apron for 3 gates.


Yeah you’re right. I didn’t look close enough. I wonder what will happen to the electric facilities just north of the snow removal equipment storage.
Last edited by ual763 on Fri Mar 16, 2018 3:30 pm, edited 1 time in total.
From flying to the NOTAM office
 
ual763
Posts: 1027
Joined: Sun May 14, 2017 11:46 am

Re: ORD Expansion Deal - Update: AA Now Onboard

Fri Mar 16, 2018 3:33 pm

CHI787ORD wrote:
If the new Global Terminal is only 8-9 WB gates as shown in the flyer, seems like its probably like it will be just for AA and UA and their "core partners"


Yeah, there’s definitely not as many gates as I would have imagined. But looking at the rendering in the flyer, it appears that the Satellite 1 will be all widebody gates. The satellite has it’s own underground link directly to the Global Terminal as well. I wonder if this will be used for solely United Intl./widebody flights? If that’s the case, then the Global terminal *should* be able to fit ALL of the other Star carriers as well as One World carriers, if I calculated it right.
From flying to the NOTAM office
 
User avatar
jetblastdubai
Posts: 1994
Joined: Sun Aug 18, 2013 10:23 am

Re: ORD Expansion Deal - Update: AA Now Onboard

Fri Mar 16, 2018 3:45 pm

CHI787ORD wrote:
If the new Global Terminal is only 8-9 WB gates as shown in the flyer, seems like its probably like it will be just for AA and UA and their "core partners"


8-9 gates will not be enough to accommodate both UA and AA (plus select Alliance partners) Int'l arrivals and departures. I would expect there will still be some repositioning of A/C after they unload from an Int'l trip. Many times these A/C will go to the hangar but even relocating them to another T1 or T3 gate for their Int'l departure would still be far, far better than moving passengers and aircraft from T5 over to T1 or T3.

It might also be possible to reconfigure T1 gates B16 and B17 to create an additional narrowbody/RJ gate or two or three if they no longer needed the widebody space up by the north port. There is a nice Club by B17 but the terminal width is relatively small up there and with 2 widebodies loading at the same time, it's really, really tight.
 
ILS28ORD
Posts: 166
Joined: Wed Jun 14, 2017 2:08 pm

Re: ORD Expansion Deal - Update: AA Now Onboard

Fri Mar 16, 2018 4:26 pm

If the 3 new gates in T3 will be common use, but every airline not named American is moving to T5, then aren't they basically exclusive use gates for AA? What's the point of calling them common use when they will be in a terminal only AA occupies.
 
chicawgo
Posts: 447
Joined: Tue Nov 29, 2011 5:09 pm

Re: ORD Expansion Deal - Update: AA Now Onboard

Fri Mar 16, 2018 5:02 pm

ual763 wrote:
CHI787ORD wrote:
If the new Global Terminal is only 8-9 WB gates as shown in the flyer, seems like its probably like it will be just for AA and UA and their "core partners"


Yeah, there’s definitely not as many gates as I would have imagined. But looking at the rendering in the flyer, it appears that the Satellite 1 will be all widebody gates. The satellite has it’s own underground link directly to the Global Terminal as well. I wonder if this will be used for solely United Intl./widebody flights? If that’s the case, then the Global terminal *should* be able to fit ALL of the other Star carriers as well as One World carriers, if I calculated it right.


Exactly. Maybe they will put all Star international in the satellite addition to C. And all OneWorld can go in the new T2 concourse.
 
ual763
Posts: 1027
Joined: Sun May 14, 2017 11:46 am

Re: ORD Expansion Deal - Update: AA Now Onboard

Fri Mar 16, 2018 5:07 pm

[photoid][/photoid]
ILS28ORD wrote:
If the 3 new gates in T3 will be common use, but every airline not named American is moving to T5, then aren't they basically exclusive use gates for AA? What's the point of calling them common use when they will be in a terminal only AA occupies.


The only airlines I can think of besides American, would be charter operators that don’t necessarily have their own check-in facilities, such as Orange Air, Omni, and troop flights on the Atlas 767s. This way instead of paying AA to use the gates, they can just pay the city. But, yeah, they may as well be AA gates.
Last edited by ual763 on Fri Mar 16, 2018 5:10 pm, edited 1 time in total.
From flying to the NOTAM office
 
ual763
Posts: 1027
Joined: Sun May 14, 2017 11:46 am

Re: ORD Expansion Deal - Update: AA Now Onboard

Fri Mar 16, 2018 5:08 pm

chicawgo wrote:
ual763 wrote:
CHI787ORD wrote:
If the new Global Terminal is only 8-9 WB gates as shown in the flyer, seems like its probably like it will be just for AA and UA and their "core partners"


Yeah, there’s definitely not as many gates as I would have imagined. But looking at the rendering in the flyer, it appears that the Satellite 1 will be all widebody gates. The satellite has it’s own underground link directly to the Global Terminal as well. I wonder if this will be used for solely United Intl./widebody flights? If that’s the case, then the Global terminal *should* be able to fit ALL of the other Star carriers as well as One World carriers, if I calculated it right.


Exactly. Maybe they will put all Star international in the satellite addition to C. And all OneWorld can go in the new T2 concourse.


That makes sense to me. Especially if the city is looking for a lot of intl. growth over the next decade or so.
From flying to the NOTAM office
 
User avatar
kngkyle
Posts: 507
Joined: Wed Dec 27, 2006 3:33 am

Re: ORD Expansion Deal - Update: AA Now Onboard

Fri Mar 16, 2018 5:20 pm

T2 should be able to handle all SA and OW international arrivals but probably not departures. UA and AA will have to tow planes to their existing widebody gates (or in the case of UA, the new widebody gates added to concourse C) in order to keep everything out of T5.
 
YouGeeElWhy
Posts: 492
Joined: Sat Feb 01, 2014 3:42 pm

Re: ORD Expansion Deal - Update: AA Now Onboard

Fri Mar 16, 2018 5:25 pm

ual763 wrote:
chicawgo wrote:
ual763 wrote:

Yeah, there’s definitely not as many gates as I would have imagined. But looking at the rendering in the flyer, it appears that the Satellite 1 will be all widebody gates. The satellite has it’s own underground link directly to the Global Terminal as well. I wonder if this will be used for solely United Intl./widebody flights? If that’s the case, then the Global terminal *should* be able to fit ALL of the other Star carriers as well as One World carriers, if I calculated it right.


Exactly. Maybe they will put all Star international in the satellite addition to C. And all OneWorld can go in the new T2 concourse.


That makes sense to me. Especially if the city is looking for a lot of intl. growth over the next decade or so.
FIS is only going to be added to the Global Terminal, right? So they will still need to have room to unload every international flight for Star and Oneworld. You would also think that the Global terminal would have enough space for both Oneworld and Star to build decent sized shared lounge facilities. Having to schlep over to C to get your flight would be a negative for Star.
 
ual763
Posts: 1027
Joined: Sun May 14, 2017 11:46 am

Re: ORD Expansion Deal - Update: AA Now Onboard

Fri Mar 16, 2018 5:28 pm

kngkyle wrote:
T2 should be able to handle all SA and OW international arrivals but probably not departures. UA and AA will have to tow planes to their existing widebody gates (or in the case of UA, the new widebody gates added to concourse C) in order to keep everything out of T5.


Wouldn’t that defeat the purpose of the new construction though? I thought the city and Airlines are trying to get away from having to tow aircraft around. If United/SA were in the new Satellte 1, they could handle all intl. arrivals and departures from there, while AA/OW could do the same in T2. The tunnel from Satellite 1 to T2 would still Route all intl. arrivals from the Satellite pier into customs in T2.
From flying to the NOTAM office
 
User avatar
kngkyle
Posts: 507
Joined: Wed Dec 27, 2006 3:33 am

Re: ORD Expansion Deal - Update: AA Now Onboard

Fri Mar 16, 2018 5:44 pm

ual763 wrote:
kngkyle wrote:
T2 should be able to handle all SA and OW international arrivals but probably not departures. UA and AA will have to tow planes to their existing widebody gates (or in the case of UA, the new widebody gates added to concourse C) in order to keep everything out of T5.


Wouldn’t that defeat the purpose of the new construction though? I thought the city and Airlines are trying to get away from having to tow aircraft around. If United/SA were in the new Satellte 1, they could handle all intl. arrivals and departures from there, while AA/OW could do the same in T2. The tunnel from Satellite 1 to T2 would still Route all intl. arrivals from the Satellite pier into customs in T2.


I highly doubt Satellite 1 and the underground tunnel will have a separate sterile zone for international arrivals. Towing the planes isn't the primary problem they are trying to fix here. The problem is the long trek connecting passengers have to make between T5 and the domestic terminals. Towing planes isn't much of a problem and has no impact to the customer experience.
 
jcwr56
Posts: 995
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 11:36 am

Re: ORD Expansion Deal - Update: AA Now Onboard

Fri Mar 16, 2018 5:54 pm

ILS28ORD wrote:
If the 3 new gates in T3 will be common use, but every airline not named American is moving to T5, then aren't they basically exclusive use gates for AA? What's the point of calling them common use when they will be in a terminal only AA occupies.


If you look at other airlines, there are carriers that operate the E175 and in theory could be gated there if needed.

Remember, there are zero exclusive use gates at O'Hare with this agreement.
 
ual763
Posts: 1027
Joined: Sun May 14, 2017 11:46 am

Re: ORD Expansion Deal - Update: AA Now Onboard

Fri Mar 16, 2018 5:56 pm

kngkyle wrote:
ual763 wrote:
kngkyle wrote:
T2 should be able to handle all SA and OW international arrivals but probably not departures. UA and AA will have to tow planes to their existing widebody gates (or in the case of UA, the new widebody gates added to concourse C) in order to keep everything out of T5.


Wouldn’t that defeat the purpose of the new construction though? I thought the city and Airlines are trying to get away from having to tow aircraft around. If United/SA were in the new Satellte 1, they could handle all intl. arrivals and departures from there, while AA/OW could do the same in T2. The tunnel from Satellite 1 to T2 would still Route all intl. arrivals from the Satellite pier into customs in T2.


I highly doubt Satellite 1 and the underground tunnel will have a separate sterile zone for international arrivals. Towing the planes isn't the primary problem they are trying to fix here. The problem is the long trek connecting passengers have to make between T5 and the domestic terminals. Towing planes isn't much of a problem and has no impact to the customer experience.


I guess we’ll find out later. My thinking was, that with the width of the underground tunnel, domestic travelers, as well as intl. departures going to either Satellite 1 or 2 will have no choice but to take a train between terminals, like many other airports, such as IAD. Whereas intl. arrivals into Satellite 1 would just take an adjacent underground walkway with moving walkways. It’s not that bad of a walk. It’s just across the ramp.
Last edited by ual763 on Fri Mar 16, 2018 6:16 pm, edited 2 times in total.
From flying to the NOTAM office
 
chicawgo
Posts: 447
Joined: Tue Nov 29, 2011 5:09 pm

Re: ORD Expansion Deal - Update: AA Now Onboard

Fri Mar 16, 2018 6:05 pm

kngkyle wrote:
ual763 wrote:
kngkyle wrote:
T2 should be able to handle all SA and OW international arrivals but probably not departures. UA and AA will have to tow planes to their existing widebody gates (or in the case of UA, the new widebody gates added to concourse C) in order to keep everything out of T5.


Wouldn’t that defeat the purpose of the new construction though? I thought the city and Airlines are trying to get away from having to tow aircraft around. If United/SA were in the new Satellte 1, they could handle all intl. arrivals and departures from there, while AA/OW could do the same in T2. The tunnel from Satellite 1 to T2 would still Route all intl. arrivals from the Satellite pier into customs in T2.


I highly doubt Satellite 1 and the underground tunnel will have a separate sterile zone for international arrivals. Towing the planes isn't the primary problem they are trying to fix here. The problem is the long trek connecting passengers have to make between T5 and the domestic terminals. Towing planes isn't much of a problem and has no impact to the customer experience.


I don't see a reason not to do it. Especially with the main goal of this being to encourage growth. It wouldn't be very difficult to just put up a divider in the tunnel for regular and non-processed int'l pax.
 
CHI787ORD
Posts: 817
Joined: Sat Jun 11, 2005 11:27 am

Re: ORD $8.5B Expansion Deal - Update: AA Now Onboard

Fri Mar 16, 2018 6:07 pm

A sterile zone divider in a tunnel is not a difficult thing to do. This is actually like the least complicated thing out of everything being proposed infrastructure wise.
 
ZBA2CGX
Posts: 124
Joined: Tue Mar 07, 2006 11:09 pm

Re: ORD $8.5B Expansion Deal - Update: AA Now Onboard

Fri Mar 16, 2018 6:49 pm

It looks like they are expanding the B pad aircraft hold area south of 9R/27F just east of the bridge. Also, looks like some changes to the taxiways in general.
 
danj555
Posts: 226
Joined: Tue Jul 23, 2013 7:16 am

Re: ORD $8.5B Expansion Deal - Update: AA Now Onboard

Fri Mar 16, 2018 11:07 pm

It feels like there are a lot of airport expansions going at the moment. We have LAX, JFK, ORD, LGA, AUS... Like all pretty high-profile big-budget projects due to wrap up in mid 2020s. Is this just normal for the industry or am I right in feeling like this is a meaningful moment?
 
ual763
Posts: 1027
Joined: Sun May 14, 2017 11:46 am

Re: ORD $8.5B Expansion Deal - Update: AA Now Onboard

Fri Mar 16, 2018 11:24 pm

danj555 wrote:
It feels like there are a lot of airport expansions going at the moment. We have LAX, JFK, ORD, LGA, AUS... Like all pretty high-profile big-budget projects due to wrap up in mid 2020s. Is this just normal for the industry or am I right in feeling like this is a meaningful moment?


Definitely a lot going on at the moment. MSY is in the middle of getting a MASSIVE new terminal as well. Exciting times for airports.
From flying to the NOTAM office
 
soflaflyer
Posts: 173
Joined: Sat Feb 16, 2008 10:35 pm

Re: ORD $8.5B Expansion Deal - Update: AA Now Onboard

Sat Mar 17, 2018 12:04 am

I am assuming that the renderings are drawn to scale to represent the max size aircraft that can occupy each gate. It would appear that overall, the AA gates support smaller aircraft than the UA gates. Does anyone have any insight into this or details?
 
ILS28ORD
Posts: 166
Joined: Wed Jun 14, 2017 2:08 pm

Re: ORD $8.5B Expansion Deal - Update: AA Now Onboard

Sat Mar 17, 2018 1:35 pm

Not that current operations indicate the future but AA flies only 788s to only a few international routes year round while UA flies larger 777s to many more year round destinations. Based on useage of gates which is what the city wants to use to allocate gates, they appear to be allocating more gates and larger ones to UA and their partners already, but realistically it's too soon to tell who gets what and what aircraft will fit in those gates.

AA and UA partners at ORD all fly 773s or larger so who knows maybe it won't matter what side of the global terminal an aircraft will park on despite its alliance.
 
User avatar
N717TW
Posts: 577
Joined: Sun Feb 14, 2016 9:24 pm

Re: ORD Expansion deal close

Sat Mar 17, 2018 4:23 pm

ADrum23 wrote:
jagraham wrote:
yeogeo wrote:
Delta spokesperson: "We are okay with the expansion — moving Delta to Terminal 5 gets us right next to SkyTeam partners, and that's a nice situation for us competitively in Chicago."

https://www.bizjournals.com/chicago/new ... j=80228051


This caught me by surprise. Delta gains nothing from being next to their Star Alliance partners unless they intend to supply connections. Which entails more than a focus city.


You mean SkyTeam partners, not star alliance.

But I agree. Right now you actually can connect into AF, KL, etc, on DL, but your origin flight has to be fron one of DL’s hubs/focus cities they serve. I will be interested to see what DL actually does here. I’d be surprised if they started any p2p flying.


I am not a member of the DL is going to crate a hub here and/or start connecting traffic in ORD club but I'll point out that there is value for DL to co-locate even without expanding.

Most of the value is around operational expenses with DL's "tightest" partners. DL/AM/AF/KE/KL/WS + any future partners can share above and definitely below wing functions, they can operate just one lounge, they can share office space and crew rest areas, bag rooms, etc. All of that can mean effectively cutting expenses for DL as it can spread the costs of the ORD operation with other partners just as they do right now in AMS and CDG. Not dramatic savings but somewhat.
 
ADrum23
Posts: 1789
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 11:54 pm

Re: ORD $8.5B Expansion Deal - Update: AA Now Onboard

Sat Mar 17, 2018 5:27 pm

On a side note, does anyone here know when runway 15/33 will be decommissioned and removed? That will have to happen before most construction can start on the new global terminal.
 
soflaflyer
Posts: 173
Joined: Sat Feb 16, 2008 10:35 pm

Re: ORD $8.5B Expansion Deal - Update: AA Now Onboard

Sat Mar 17, 2018 9:22 pm

ILS28ORD wrote:
Not that current operations indicate the future but AA flies only 788s to only a few international routes year round while UA flies larger 777s to many more year round destinations. Based on useage of gates which is what the city wants to use to allocate gates, they appear to be allocating more gates and larger ones to UA and their partners already, but realistically it's too soon to tell who gets what and what aircraft will fit in those gates.

AA and UA partners at ORD all fly 773s or larger so who knows maybe it won't matter what side of the global terminal an aircraft will park on despite its alliance.

Good point. Does anyone know where to find the # of mainline vs regional flights for AA and UA at ORD?
 
User avatar
PerfectGriffin
Posts: 540
Joined: Thu Jun 16, 2016 7:35 am

Re: ORD $8.5B Expansion Deal - Update: AA Now Onboard

Sat Mar 17, 2018 9:32 pm

ual763 wrote:
danj555 wrote:
It feels like there are a lot of airport expansions going at the moment. We have LAX, JFK, ORD, LGA, AUS... Like all pretty high-profile big-budget projects due to wrap up in mid 2020s. Is this just normal for the industry or am I right in feeling like this is a meaningful moment?


Definitely a lot going on at the moment. MSY is in the middle of getting a MASSIVE new terminal as well. Exciting times for airports.


Its about time. US airports are lagging behind their global counterparts (especially the major hubs in Asia) in terms of technology and airport experiences.
  • 1
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos