User avatar
yeogeo
Topic Author
Posts: 1171
Joined: Sun Jul 26, 2009 2:47 pm

Delta & O’Hare 21

Mon Dec 17, 2018 6:42 pm

O’Hare Airport’s massive O’Hare21 project has Delta’s operations moving to the expanded Terminal 5 in about 2021 (best guess at the moment).
At that point Delta’s Skyteam partners will be all housed in T-5 along with a handful of unaligned carriers.
(meaning DL, AM, AF, AZ, UP, KX, EK, EY, HU, FI, 4O, KL, KE, DI, Y4, EI, WW(?) -and eventually, AS NK, & B6?).
In all there will be 28 gates in T-5 then and possibly a number of hardstands.

In the new system airlines will not own gates but operate at them under a system of “preferential” gate assignments. What that means exactly is not yet clear, but seeing how Delta signed onto the plan readily (at least compared to the huge AA vs UA dustup) I think one can assume Delta is in for an improvement at O’Hare -although that's not hard to imagine with Delta’s current state of affairs in T-2.

The revamped T-5 can be seen here:
https://www.flightglobal.com/news/artic ... ns-453321/

I’m interested in hearing what Delta would conceivably do in terms of frequencies and destinations with these new digs, which will include gates that can handle widebodies. Are we talking new point to point routes or just additional frequencies to hubs?

Also wondering besides domestic routes, whether DL would add any international flights in your opinion, and what Skyteam partners who aren’t already flying into O’Hare might join them in the expanded T-5.

Do you think this will be a game-changer for Delta or just an incremental improvement?
 
stlgph
Posts: 10969
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 4:19 pm

Re: Delta & O’Hare 21

Mon Dec 17, 2018 6:48 pm

Even if T5 is done in 2021, United, American and their best friends will still need T5 space until the planned work with T1 and T2 is complete which is probably a good 5 years min. at best even if the shovels dropped today.

So don't get too excited about Delta moving over and going real apecrazy any time soon.
Last edited by stlgph on Mon Dec 17, 2018 6:51 pm, edited 1 time in total.
if assumptions could fly, airliners.net would be the world's busiest airport
 
WWads
Posts: 324
Joined: Mon Jul 03, 2017 11:18 pm

Re: Delta & O’Hare 21

Mon Dec 17, 2018 6:50 pm

My impression is that DL desperately wants to expand at ORD but doesn't have the space. I don't think we'll see a focus city, but I do think there will be strategic O/D flights.

I could see them adding places like LAX, BNA, AUS, MCO, and BDL.
 
flyguy84
Posts: 770
Joined: Thu Dec 22, 2016 7:26 pm

Re: Delta & O’Hare 21

Mon Dec 17, 2018 6:59 pm

[list=][/list]Delta already tried ORD-CDG and that failed. I don’t see any other international flights from them at ORD. The only other one that would make sense is AMS and they are best to leave that to KLM.

UA/AA have the connecting traffic to make their international flights work. DL does not and can’t profitably fill it on O&D.
SFO
 
User avatar
Midwestindy
Posts: 4011
Joined: Sun Mar 12, 2017 3:56 am

Re: Delta & O’Hare 21

Mon Dec 17, 2018 7:06 pm

WWads wrote:
My impression is that DL desperately wants to expand at ORD but doesn't have the space. I don't think we'll see a focus city, but I do think there will be strategic O/D flights.

I could see them adding places like LAX, BNA, AUS, MCO, and BDL.


Outside of maybe LAX, a build up like that would basically be setting money on fire.
Status for 2019/2020: AAdvantage Platinum, Delta Gold, Southwest A-List
 
qcpilotxf
Posts: 201
Joined: Sun Sep 02, 2012 2:10 am

Re: Delta & O’Hare 21

Mon Dec 17, 2018 7:09 pm

flyguy84 wrote:
[list=][/list]Delta already tried ORD-CDG and that failed. I don’t see any other international flights from them at ORD. The only other one that would make sense is AMS and they are best to leave that to KLM.

UA/AA have the connecting traffic to make their international flights work. DL does not and can’t profitably fill it on O&D.


You have to remember though they could easily return to AMS or CDG from ORD. They may not have feed on the ORD side but they have huge hubs on the AMS and CDG side. When you talk International flights you have to remember your not talking about DL, your talking about DL and their Atlantic JV partners. DL will do what the JV decides is best.
 
deltal1011man
Posts: 5332
Joined: Mon Sep 19, 2005 9:17 am

Re: Delta & O’Hare 21

Mon Dec 17, 2018 7:12 pm

yeogeo wrote:
O’Hare Airport’s massive O’Hare21 project has Delta’s operations moving to the expanded Terminal 5 in about 2021 (best guess at the moment).
At that point Delta’s Skyteam partners will be all housed in T-5 along with a handful of unaligned carriers.
(meaning DL, AM, AF, AZ, UP, KX, EK, EY, HU, FI, 4O, KL, KE, DI, Y4, EI, WW(?) -and eventually, AS NK, & B6?).
In all there will be 28 gates in T-5 then and possibly a number of hardstands.

In the new system airlines will not own gates but operate at them under a system of “preferential” gate assignments. What that means exactly is not yet clear, but seeing how Delta signed onto the plan readily (at least compared to the huge AA vs UA dustup) I think one can assume Delta is in for an improvement at O’Hare -although that's not hard to imagine with Delta’s current state of affairs in T-2.

The revamped T-5 can be seen here:
https://www.flightglobal.com/news/artic ... ns-453321/

I’m interested in hearing what Delta would conceivably do in terms of frequencies and destinations with these new digs, which will include gates that can handle widebodies. Are we talking new point to point routes or just additional frequencies to hubs?

Also wondering besides domestic routes, whether DL would add any international flights in your opinion, and what Skyteam partners who aren’t already flying into O’Hare might join them in the expanded T-5.

Do you think this will be a game-changer for Delta or just an incremental improvement?

Hopefully this will mean a much bigger SkyClub. The current one is a friggin zoo on the best days.

flyguy84 wrote:
[list=][/list]Delta already tried ORD-CDG and that failed. I don’t see any other international flights from them at ORD. The only other one that would make sense is AMS and they are best to leave that to KLM.

UA/AA have the connecting traffic to make their international flights work. DL does not and can’t profitably fill it on O&D.

No they didn't. Air France is taking over the CDG flight.
WWads wrote:
My impression is that DL desperately wants to expand at ORD but doesn't have the space. I don't think we'll see a focus city, but I do think there will be strategic O/D flights.

I could see them adding places like LAX, BNA, AUS, MCO, and BDL.

the only place on this list that might see flights to ORD is LAX.

And I think Delta is up to ~9 flights per day per gate at T2 so they won't be doing much, if any, expanding till they move to T5.
 
User avatar
OzarkD9S
Posts: 5367
Joined: Tue Oct 23, 2001 2:31 am

Re: Delta & O’Hare 21

Mon Dec 17, 2018 7:18 pm

yeogeo wrote:

-and eventually, AS NK, & B6?).


I would imagine AS stays as close to AA as possible.
Finally headed to DORKFEST! Sept 7, STL-LAX-PHX-STL. :cloudnine:
 
User avatar
yeogeo
Topic Author
Posts: 1171
Joined: Sun Jul 26, 2009 2:47 pm

Re: Delta & O’Hare 21

Mon Dec 17, 2018 7:23 pm

stlgph wrote:
Even if T5 is done in 2021, United, American and their best friends will still need T5 space until the planned work with T1 and T2 is complete which is probably a good 5 years min. at best even if the shovels dropped today.

We are talking medium-term plans, it's true, but the first effect of the move will mean vastly better gate areas and more capable gates than Delta experiences now, even if the full effect is a ways off.

flyguy84 wrote:
Delta already tried ORD-CDG and that failed.

That's not how I remember that situation. Seems to me Delta subbed for Air France for a time after which AF resumed that flying, so I wouldn't say Delta "failed" at that route. Anyway, It was nice to see DL 767's at O'Hare for a time- a rare sight there.

flyguy84 wrote:
I don’t see any other international flights from them at ORD. The only other one that would make sense is AMS and they are best to leave that to KLM.

Don't know why they'd best do that, necessarily. If an additional flight is warranted, I should think DL would step up, seeing as it would have the gates to handle widebodies.
 
jbs2886
Posts: 2110
Joined: Wed Apr 01, 2015 9:07 pm

Re: Delta & O’Hare 21

Mon Dec 17, 2018 7:28 pm

deltal1011man wrote:
Hopefully this will mean a much bigger SkyClub. The current one is a friggin zoo on the best days.


When I was in the lounge a few weeks ago, one of the staff members specifically said the new SkyClub will be the "largest" in the system. While I take that statement with a grain of salt, I think we can glean from it that it will be larger - particularly in light of the connecting of the dots recently (SEA, RDU, BOS).

Edit just to add that I expect LAX and possibly LHR to come back (it just feels as if ORD is important for the JV's LHR point-of-sale).
 
evank516
Posts: 1944
Joined: Wed Mar 01, 2017 12:15 am

Re: Delta & O’Hare 21

Mon Dec 17, 2018 7:38 pm

WWads wrote:
My impression is that DL desperately wants to expand at ORD but doesn't have the space. I don't think we'll see a focus city, but I do think there will be strategic O/D flights.

I could see them adding places like LAX, BNA, AUS, MCO, and BDL.


They need to upgauge more of their LGA flights. They're going up against a lot of capacity by AA and UA.
 
User avatar
yeogeo
Topic Author
Posts: 1171
Joined: Sun Jul 26, 2009 2:47 pm

Re: Delta & O’Hare 21

Mon Dec 17, 2018 7:40 pm

yeogeo wrote:
Delta’s Skyteam partners will be all housed in T-5 along with a handful of unaligned carriers.
(meaning DL, AM, AF, AZ, UP, KX, EK, EY, HU, FI, 4O, KL, KE, DI, Y4, EI, WW(?) -and eventually, AS NK, & B6?).

Forgot MU in that list of existing Skyteam carriers at O'Hare.
 
FSDan
Posts: 2477
Joined: Mon Jan 03, 2011 5:27 pm

Re: Delta & O’Hare 21

Mon Dec 17, 2018 7:49 pm

I'd expect enough of a presence for DL to be competitive in all their hub/focus markets to ORD, but not much more than that. Certainly I'd think LAX-ORD will be in the cards once DL has the operational headroom at both ORD and LAX to add it. Maybe some frequency increases in the newer DL markets ex ORD (SEA, RDU, BOS) and some added frequencies to the fortress hubs that have had frequencies scaled back to accommodate SEA, RDU, and BOS.

International expansion for DL at ORD just doesn't make much sense with both MSP and DTW nearby (same can be said for a domestic presence that is anything more than O&D focused). The only international route I could potentially see DL wanting to be in is ORD-LHR since that's currently a hole for DL/VS. If they want to get back into that market and they determine all VS aircraft are too large, then maybe DL would start a 763 service. Any DL international service beyond that would shock me.
This is my signature until I think of a better one.
 
NCAD95
Posts: 46
Joined: Fri Aug 10, 2018 12:11 am

Re: Delta & O’Hare 21

Mon Dec 17, 2018 8:01 pm

WWads wrote:
My impression is that DL desperately wants to expand at ORD but doesn't have the space. I don't think we'll see a focus city, but I do think there will be strategic O/D flights.

I could see them adding places like LAX, BNA, AUS, MCO, and BDL.



And what is this impression based on ?
 
jbs2886
Posts: 2110
Joined: Wed Apr 01, 2015 9:07 pm

Re: Delta & O’Hare 21

Mon Dec 17, 2018 8:51 pm

evank516 wrote:
WWads wrote:
My impression is that DL desperately wants to expand at ORD but doesn't have the space. I don't think we'll see a focus city, but I do think there will be strategic O/D flights.

I could see them adding places like LAX, BNA, AUS, MCO, and BDL.


They need to upgauge more of their LGA flights. They're going up against a lot of capacity by AA and UA.


Why? What is the benefit of adding *more* capacity? DL is offering frequency and product its flyers want. Moreover, DL will be operating 15 weekday daily flights with about half on mainline (in fact, IIRC I've seen reports that mainline could be all but a handful in the future).
 
maps4ltd
Posts: 284
Joined: Tue May 08, 2018 4:48 pm

Re: Delta & O’Hare 21

Mon Dec 17, 2018 8:53 pm

Could DL add more from Midway? They could be the only carrier to service a viable number of hubs from both ORD and MDW, and that is an attractive position.
Delta Gold Medallion and Southwest A-List
 
blockski
Posts: 497
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2016 8:30 pm

Re: Delta & O’Hare 21

Mon Dec 17, 2018 9:12 pm

stlgph wrote:
Even if T5 is done in 2021, United, American and their best friends will still need T5 space until the planned work with T1 and T2 is complete which is probably a good 5 years min. at best even if the shovels dropped today.

So don't get too excited about Delta moving over and going real apecrazy any time soon.


Yeah, the extremely vague timeline on O'Hare's website suggests 2021 for T5, and a nebulous timeframe of 2021-2026 for completion of the new T2.

There are no details available publicly to my knowledge about specific phasing. For example, it's plausible that the new satellite could open first (attached to the existing satellite) and thus UA moves their T2 flights to the satellite, AA moves with the other airlines to an expanded T5 while the existing T2 is demolished...

All of which is to enforce your earlier point: there's not much net-new gate space until the new T2 is up and running, and that's going to be the key factor for service expansion.
 
FSDan
Posts: 2477
Joined: Mon Jan 03, 2011 5:27 pm

Re: Delta & O’Hare 21

Mon Dec 17, 2018 9:14 pm

maps4ltd wrote:
They could be the only carrier to service a viable number of hubs from both ORD and MDW, and that is an attractive position.


They already are the only carrier to do that. They provide coverage West, East, and South from MDW via MSP, DTW, and ATL.
This is my signature until I think of a better one.
 
kavok
Posts: 555
Joined: Wed May 11, 2016 10:12 pm

Re: Delta & O’Hare 21

Mon Dec 17, 2018 9:18 pm

T5 serves two main purposes for DL.
1- It creates a setup where all SkyTeam/DL JV airlines are in the same terminal.
2- It (eventually) provides DL with more gate availability then they have now, even if they are common use.

Both of these are an improvement over the existing setup, so of course they are on board.
 
jagraham
Posts: 862
Joined: Sun Jul 17, 2016 11:10 pm

Re: Delta & O’Hare 21

Mon Dec 17, 2018 9:31 pm

The article says Satellite 2 (furthest west) will be done first, so UA can vacate T2 so it can be demolished and the Global Terminal built.
So UA will move to Satellite 2 and will not be a factor in T5.
Apparently AA gets another 3 stinger gates also; that combined with UA moving directly into Satellite 1 should keep UA and AA out of T5.
So if UA and AA don't need T5, then T5 can be expanded solely for DL, allied carriers, B6 and NK.
I didn't see T5 timing in the article, but except for (perhaps) a sterile people mover, there is no need to two step. T5 can be expanded and DL can move in (out of T3) along with the others in the list. Leaving enough for AA.
In fact, the only real question is a) Why not build all the satellites at the same time, b) Why not do the people mover first (or at least build the tunnel) then build the satellites on top?
 
evank516
Posts: 1944
Joined: Wed Mar 01, 2017 12:15 am

Re: Delta & O’Hare 21

Mon Dec 17, 2018 9:40 pm

jbs2886 wrote:
evank516 wrote:
WWads wrote:
My impression is that DL desperately wants to expand at ORD but doesn't have the space. I don't think we'll see a focus city, but I do think there will be strategic O/D flights.

I could see them adding places like LAX, BNA, AUS, MCO, and BDL.


They need to upgauge more of their LGA flights. They're going up against a lot of capacity by AA and UA.


Why? What is the benefit of adding *more* capacity? DL is offering frequency and product its flyers want. Moreover, DL will be operating 15 weekday daily flights with about half on mainline (in fact, IIRC I've seen reports that mainline could be all but a handful in the future).


That's what I mean. They need to upgauge from E175s to mainline. This is what they plan to do is go head to head on routes where UA and AA competes (look at the A220s on LGA-DFW, JFK-DFW, and LGA-IAH). The addition of the 717s is a great move on their part IMHO, and they need to continue to add more which is what you say they're doing anyway. Extra capacity is also a band aid on the gate constraints.
 
Fargo
Posts: 810
Joined: Fri Sep 21, 2018 3:00 am

Re: Delta & O’Hare 21

Mon Dec 17, 2018 9:47 pm

My prediction:

DL will move to T5, build a much bigger and state-of-the-art SkyClub, cut CVG, put the A220 on LGA when they get more of them, add LAX and maybe AUS if DL puts a hub/focus city there.

That’s it.

There will be no DL p2p flying (domestic or international) out of ORD because they’d get clobbered yield wise and it would hurt DTW/MSP too much.
 
stlgph
Posts: 10969
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 4:19 pm

Re: Delta & O’Hare 21

Mon Dec 17, 2018 9:52 pm

jagraham wrote:
The article says Satellite 2 (furthest west) will be done first, so UA can vacate T2 so it can be demolished and the Global Terminal built.
So UA will move to Satellite 2 and will not be a factor in T5.
Apparently AA gets another 3 stinger gates also; that combined with UA moving directly into Satellite 1 should keep UA and AA out of T5.
So if UA and AA don't need T5, then T5 can be expanded solely for DL, allied carriers, B6 and NK.
I didn't see T5 timing in the article, but except for (perhaps) a sterile people mover, there is no need to two step. T5 can be expanded and DL can move in (out of T3) along with the others in the list. Leaving enough for AA.
In fact, the only real question is a) Why not build all the satellites at the same time, b) Why not do the people mover first (or at least build the tunnel) then build the satellites on top?


American, United and their best friends will need T5 for customs, and in many cases, departures until the new Terminal 2 is fully up and running.
if assumptions could fly, airliners.net would be the world's busiest airport
 
jagraham
Posts: 862
Joined: Sun Jul 17, 2016 11:10 pm

Re: Delta & O’Hare 21

Mon Dec 17, 2018 9:57 pm

stlgph wrote:
jagraham wrote:
The article says Satellite 2 (furthest west) will be done first, so UA can vacate T2 so it can be demolished and the Global Terminal built.
So UA will move to Satellite 2 and will not be a factor in T5.
Apparently AA gets another 3 stinger gates also; that combined with UA moving directly into Satellite 1 should keep UA and AA out of T5.
So if UA and AA don't need T5, then T5 can be expanded solely for DL, allied carriers, B6 and NK.
I didn't see T5 timing in the article, but except for (perhaps) a sterile people mover, there is no need to two step. T5 can be expanded and DL can move in (out of T3) along with the others in the list. Leaving enough for AA.
In fact, the only real question is a) Why not build all the satellites at the same time, b) Why not do the people mover first (or at least build the tunnel) then build the satellites on top?


American, United and their best friends will need T5 for customs, and in many cases, departures until the new Terminal 2 is fully up and running.


Agreed for arrivals, but that is what they do now. As for departures, they depart from any gate with a passport check, so they don't need T5 for departures if their gate counts don't change much. Which it won't if UA doesn't move until Satellite 2 is done, and AA gets the 3 extra stinger gates, and DL gates when DL goes to T5.
 
User avatar
yeogeo
Topic Author
Posts: 1171
Joined: Sun Jul 26, 2009 2:47 pm

Re: Delta & O’Hare 21

Mon Dec 17, 2018 9:58 pm

blockski wrote:
...it's plausible that the new satellite could open first (attached to the existing satellite) and thus UA moves their T2 flights to the satellite, AA moves with the other airlines to an expanded T5 while the existing T2 is demolished...


No, you don't have it quite right. AA stays put in T-3; AA has nothing to do with T-2 now and therefore the demolition of that terminal will not affect it. UA stays in T-1 and its B&C gates. After the T-5 revamp, next on the docket is Satellite 2, the western-most one (left side of illustration) which is where AC and UA RJ's will move to, then follows the T-2 demolition. The only carriers that must occupy T-5 while the so-called Global Terminal is constructed are international arrivals of AA & UA plus their international partners. The Global Terminal with FIS for AA/UA and partners will be in two parts: the Y-shaped structure on the site of T-2 AND the first satellite (Sat 1).

jagraham wrote:
The article says Satellite 2 (furthest west) will be done first, so UA can vacate T2 so it can be demolished and the Global Terminal built.
So UA will move to Satellite 2 and will not be a factor in T5.
Apparently AA gets another 3 stinger gates also; that combined with UA moving directly into Satellite 1 should keep UA and AA out of T5.

Exactly - except for AA/UA's int'l arrivals.
 
jagraham
Posts: 862
Joined: Sun Jul 17, 2016 11:10 pm

Re: Delta & O’Hare 21

Mon Dec 17, 2018 10:04 pm

Fargo wrote:
My prediction:

DL will move to T5, build a much bigger and state-of-the-art SkyClub, cut CVG, put the A220 on LGA when they get more of them, add LAX and maybe AUS if DL puts a hub/focus city there.

That’s it.

There will be no DL p2p flying (domestic or international) out of ORD because they’d get clobbered yield wise and it would hurt DTW/MSP too much.


LAX is the biggest hole and it is a hub. Plus a couple of timed departures and arrivals will help Skyteam compete with the ME3 (no point in transferring in the US if the ME3 takes you directly to 8 cities). It does not have to be a lot of capacity; 717s or A220s will do.

I could make a case for some p2p flying to keep medallions on DL, but DL has higher priorities. Especially with the MD80s going away in the short term.
 
User avatar
Midwestindy
Posts: 4011
Joined: Sun Mar 12, 2017 3:56 am

Re: Delta & O’Hare 21

Mon Dec 17, 2018 10:04 pm

evank516 wrote:
jbs2886 wrote:
evank516 wrote:

They need to upgauge more of their LGA flights. They're going up against a lot of capacity by AA and UA.


Why? What is the benefit of adding *more* capacity? DL is offering frequency and product its flyers want. Moreover, DL will be operating 15 weekday daily flights with about half on mainline (in fact, IIRC I've seen reports that mainline could be all but a handful in the future).


That's what I mean. They need to upgauge from E175s to mainline. This is what they plan to do is go head to head on routes where UA and AA competes (look at the A220s on LGA-DFW, JFK-DFW, and LGA-IAH). The addition of the 717s is a great move on their part IMHO, and they need to continue to add more which is what you say they're doing anyway. Extra capacity is also a band aid on the gate constraints.


LGA-ORD is all mainline in the summer, not sure how much more you can ask for on this route.....
Status for 2019/2020: AAdvantage Platinum, Delta Gold, Southwest A-List
 
User avatar
yeogeo
Topic Author
Posts: 1171
Joined: Sun Jul 26, 2009 2:47 pm

Re: Delta & O’Hare 21

Mon Dec 17, 2018 10:14 pm

Fargo wrote:
There will be no DL p2p flying (domestic or international) out of ORD because they’d get clobbered yield wise and it would hurt DTW/MSP too much.


This part I just don't get. Why do you talk about yields and ignore the O&D of Chicago in certain important business routes (ORD>LHR for example) which DL may what to participate in? ORD-LAX is similar and that route is clearly in DL's sights. In what way would these p2p routes hurt DTW or MSP? Just curious.
 
drdisque
Posts: 1057
Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2007 9:57 am

Re: Delta & O’Hare 21

Mon Dec 17, 2018 10:19 pm

DL only flies to MDW on routes where they feel the need to strike back at WN. They currently fly all of those routes. I think them adding MDW to SEA, LAX, NYC, or SLC is very unlikely as they would get clobbered by WN on that route and/or cannibalize their own flight from ORD.
 
jbs2886
Posts: 2110
Joined: Wed Apr 01, 2015 9:07 pm

Re: Delta & O’Hare 21

Mon Dec 17, 2018 10:20 pm

evank516 wrote:
jbs2886 wrote:
evank516 wrote:

They need to upgauge more of their LGA flights. They're going up against a lot of capacity by AA and UA.


Why? What is the benefit of adding *more* capacity? DL is offering frequency and product its flyers want. Moreover, DL will be operating 15 weekday daily flights with about half on mainline (in fact, IIRC I've seen reports that mainline could be all but a handful in the future).


That's what I mean. They need to upgauge from E175s to mainline. This is what they plan to do is go head to head on routes where UA and AA competes (look at the A220s on LGA-DFW, JFK-DFW, and LGA-IAH). The addition of the 717s is a great move on their part IMHO, and they need to continue to add more which is what you say they're doing anyway. Extra capacity is also a band aid on the gate constraints.


Except you haven't explained what benefit there is to adding larger aircraft. Its not like there is a product difference (frankly, E175s offer better upgrade potential). What benefit does DL have by doing a market share grab?
 
User avatar
Midwestindy
Posts: 4011
Joined: Sun Mar 12, 2017 3:56 am

Re: Delta & O’Hare 21

Mon Dec 17, 2018 10:24 pm

jagraham wrote:
LAX is the biggest hole and it is a hub. Plus a couple of timed departures and arrivals will help Skyteam compete with the ME3 (no point in transferring in the US if the ME3 takes you directly to 8 cities). It does not have to be a lot of capacity; 717s or A220s will do.

I could make a case for some p2p flying to keep medallions on DL, but DL has higher priorities. Especially with the MD80s going away in the short term.


Does the B717 have the legs for ORD-LAX?

Not even sure what p2p routes would work on DL without getting UA and AA worked up.

kavok wrote:
T5 serves two main purposes for DL.
1- It creates a setup where all SkyTeam/DL JV airlines are in the same terminal.
2- It (eventually) provides DL with more gate availability then they have now, even if they are common use.

Both of these are an improvement over the existing setup, so of course they are on board.


How much gate availability do they have now? By end of September they will have 66 departures....

yeogeo wrote:
Fargo wrote:
There will be no DL p2p flying (domestic or international) out of ORD because they’d get clobbered yield wise and it would hurt DTW/MSP too much.


This part I just don't get. Why do you talk about yields and ignore the O&D of Chicago in certain important business routes (ORD>LHR for example) which DL may what to participate in? ORD-LAX is similar and that route is clearly in DL's sights. In what way would these p2p routes hurt DTW or MSP? Just curious.


Because yields are more important than O&D. You could have lots of O&D on a route, but if you can only get low yields from those passengers, you might as well use the aircraft on routes that will generate higher yield from your hubs/focus cities.

ORD-LAX is a completely different story, as LAX is a large hub for DL. But, a route like MCO/AUS-ORD, where DL doesn't have point-of-sale strength on either end is a disaster waiting to happen.
Status for 2019/2020: AAdvantage Platinum, Delta Gold, Southwest A-List
 
deltal1011man
Posts: 5332
Joined: Mon Sep 19, 2005 9:17 am

Re: Delta & O’Hare 21

Mon Dec 17, 2018 10:25 pm

jagraham wrote:
Fargo wrote:
My prediction:

DL will move to T5, build a much bigger and state-of-the-art SkyClub, cut CVG, put the A220 on LGA when they get more of them, add LAX and maybe AUS if DL puts a hub/focus city there.

That’s it.

There will be no DL p2p flying (domestic or international) out of ORD because they’d get clobbered yield wise and it would hurt DTW/MSP too much.


LAX is the biggest hole and it is a hub. Plus a couple of timed departures and arrivals will help Skyteam compete with the ME3 (no point in transferring in the US if the ME3 takes you directly to 8 cities). It does not have to be a lot of capacity; 717s or A220s will do.

I could make a case for some p2p flying to keep medallions on DL, but DL has higher priorities. Especially with the MD80s going away in the short term.

I have no idea how Delta adding ORD-LAX has anything to do with the ME3? If Delta adds that route it will be for LAX O&D and maybe to feed places like SYD and Hawaii.
No one is going to connect in ORD on a ST flight from LA.
Also if Delta does LAX-ORD it would have to be on 220s or 32S/737s. The E75 and 717s don't have the legs to do the flight. As the 220 fleet builds I expect Delta to give LAX a shot with 3-4 daily. It will be a blood bath though.

yeogeo wrote:
Fargo wrote:
There will be no DL p2p flying (domestic or international) out of ORD because they’d get clobbered yield wise and it would hurt DTW/MSP too much.


This part I just don't get. Why do you talk about yields and ignore the O&D of Chicago in certain important business routes (ORD>LHR for example) which DL may what to participate in? ORD-LAX is similar and that route is clearly in DL's sights. In what way would these p2p routes hurt DTW or MSP? Just curious.

As I said above, LAX-ORD would be 95% about LAX POS.

Adding something like ORD-AUS doesn't benefit the network and would be a dumpster fire.
 
TTailedTiger
Posts: 1249
Joined: Sun Aug 26, 2018 5:19 am

Re: Delta & O’Hare 21

Mon Dec 17, 2018 10:26 pm

Fargo wrote:
My prediction:

DL will move to T5, build a much bigger and state-of-the-art SkyClub, cut CVG, put the A220 on LGA when they get more of them, add LAX and maybe AUS if DL puts a hub/focus city there.

That’s it.

There will be no DL p2p flying (domestic or international) out of ORD because they’d get clobbered yield wise and it would hurt DTW/MSP too much.


Why would Delta cut an important business market like ORD from CVG? They have four flights a day CVG-ORD.
 
Planeboy17
Posts: 285
Joined: Tue Feb 06, 2018 2:18 am

Re: Delta & O’Hare 21

Mon Dec 17, 2018 10:39 pm

Midwestindy wrote:
evank516 wrote:
jbs2886 wrote:

Why? What is the benefit of adding *more* capacity? DL is offering frequency and product its flyers want. Moreover, DL will be operating 15 weekday daily flights with about half on mainline (in fact, IIRC I've seen reports that mainline could be all but a handful in the future).


That's what I mean. They need to upgauge from E175s to mainline. This is what they plan to do is go head to head on routes where UA and AA competes (look at the A220s on LGA-DFW, JFK-DFW, and LGA-IAH). The addition of the 717s is a great move on their part IMHO, and they need to continue to add more which is what you say they're doing anyway. Extra capacity is also a band aid on the gate constraints.


LGA-ORD is all mainline in the summer, not sure how much more you can ask for on this route.....

All 717s in fact, 15 a day during the week.
 
User avatar
Midwestindy
Posts: 4011
Joined: Sun Mar 12, 2017 3:56 am

Re: Delta & O’Hare 21

Mon Dec 17, 2018 10:44 pm

TTailedTiger wrote:
Fargo wrote:
My prediction:

DL will move to T5, build a much bigger and state-of-the-art SkyClub, cut CVG, put the A220 on LGA when they get more of them, add LAX and maybe AUS if DL puts a hub/focus city there.

That’s it.

There will be no DL p2p flying (domestic or international) out of ORD because they’d get clobbered yield wise and it would hurt DTW/MSP too much.


Why would Delta cut an important business market like ORD from CVG? They have four flights a day CVG-ORD.


Southwest’s route to Chicago Midway has resulted in 66 percent more capacity in the market and put heavy downward pressure on yields. According to OAG’s DOT Analyser, average yields in CVG-ORD market prior to Southwest starting service from Midway were around U.S.₵ 80. Since then, airlines operating CVG-ORD have reduced yields to around U.S.₵ 40-50 while Southwest is operating with yields on CVG-MDW of U.S.₵ 35.

With the gate constraints in ORD, no hub on either end, and the route operated mostly by CR2s, I don't see how it remains much longer and would be surprised if it was profitable at this point.
Last edited by Midwestindy on Mon Dec 17, 2018 10:45 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Status for 2019/2020: AAdvantage Platinum, Delta Gold, Southwest A-List
 
Planeboy17
Posts: 285
Joined: Tue Feb 06, 2018 2:18 am

Re: Delta & O’Hare 21

Mon Dec 17, 2018 10:44 pm

TTailedTiger wrote:
Fargo wrote:
My prediction:

DL will move to T5, build a much bigger and state-of-the-art SkyClub, cut CVG, put the A220 on LGA when they get more of them, add LAX and maybe AUS if DL puts a hub/focus city there.

That’s it.

There will be no DL p2p flying (domestic or international) out of ORD because they’d get clobbered yield wise and it would hurt DTW/MSP too much.


Why would Delta cut an important business market like ORD from CVG? They have four flights a day CVG-ORD.

I don’t know if they’ll cut the route but they’ve been cutting seats and flights on this route.
They used to do 5 a day and at one point ( just a couple of years ago) it was all CRJ 900s. Now it’s all 200s.
Meanwhile UA and AA are operating more flights with 700s and 170/175s on it.
Not to mention the gate constraints at ORD are only going to get worse when BOS comes on line in September.
 
TTailedTiger
Posts: 1249
Joined: Sun Aug 26, 2018 5:19 am

Re: Delta & O’Hare 21

Mon Dec 17, 2018 10:47 pm

Midwestindy wrote:
TTailedTiger wrote:
Fargo wrote:
My prediction:

DL will move to T5, build a much bigger and state-of-the-art SkyClub, cut CVG, put the A220 on LGA when they get more of them, add LAX and maybe AUS if DL puts a hub/focus city there.

That’s it.

There will be no DL p2p flying (domestic or international) out of ORD because they’d get clobbered yield wise and it would hurt DTW/MSP too much.


Why would Delta cut an important business market like ORD from CVG? They have four flights a day CVG-ORD.


Southwest’s route to Chicago Midway has resulted in 66 percent more capacity in the market and put heavy downward pressure on yields. According to OAG’s DOT Analyser, average yields in CVG-ORD market prior to Southwest starting service from Midway were around U.S.₵ 80. Since then, airlines operating CVG-ORD have reduced yields to around U.S.₵ 40-50 while Southwest is operating with yields on CVG-MDW of U.S.₵ 35.

With the gate constraints in ORD, no hub on either end, and the route operated mostly by CR2s, I don't see how it remains much longer and would be surprised if it was profitable at this point.


Delta still flys from CVG to much smaller markets than ORD. They still fly to BDL once a day... There's no way they are giving up Chicago with the amount of frequent flyer and corporate contracts they have in the Cincinnati area. You have absolutely no evidence to backup such a claim.
 
User avatar
Midwestindy
Posts: 4011
Joined: Sun Mar 12, 2017 3:56 am

Re: Delta & O’Hare 21

Mon Dec 17, 2018 11:03 pm

TTailedTiger wrote:
Midwestindy wrote:
TTailedTiger wrote:

Why would Delta cut an important business market like ORD from CVG? They have four flights a day CVG-ORD.


Southwest’s route to Chicago Midway has resulted in 66 percent more capacity in the market and put heavy downward pressure on yields. According to OAG’s DOT Analyser, average yields in CVG-ORD market prior to Southwest starting service from Midway were around U.S.₵ 80. Since then, airlines operating CVG-ORD have reduced yields to around U.S.₵ 40-50 while Southwest is operating with yields on CVG-MDW of U.S.₵ 35.

With the gate constraints in ORD, no hub on either end, and the route operated mostly by CR2s, I don't see how it remains much longer and would be surprised if it was profitable at this point.


Delta still flys from CVG to much smaller markets than ORD. They still fly to BDL once a day... There's no way they are giving up Chicago with the amount of frequent flyer and corporate contracts they have in the Cincinnati area. You have absolutely no evidence to backup such a claim.


If you would like to read through what I wrote, I outlined multiple reasons why DL would cut the route using reason and statistics.

CVG-BDL is a red herring in this discussion
Last edited by Midwestindy on Mon Dec 17, 2018 11:06 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Status for 2019/2020: AAdvantage Platinum, Delta Gold, Southwest A-List
 
stlgph
Posts: 10969
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 4:19 pm

Re: Delta & O’Hare 21

Mon Dec 17, 2018 11:05 pm

jagraham wrote:
stlgph wrote:
jagraham wrote:
The article says Satellite 2 (furthest west) will be done first, so UA can vacate T2 so it can be demolished and the Global Terminal built.
So UA will move to Satellite 2 and will not be a factor in T5.
Apparently AA gets another 3 stinger gates also; that combined with UA moving directly into Satellite 1 should keep UA and AA out of T5.
So if UA and AA don't need T5, then T5 can be expanded solely for DL, allied carriers, B6 and NK.
I didn't see T5 timing in the article, but except for (perhaps) a sterile people mover, there is no need to two step. T5 can be expanded and DL can move in (out of T3) along with the others in the list. Leaving enough for AA.
In fact, the only real question is a) Why not build all the satellites at the same time, b) Why not do the people mover first (or at least build the tunnel) then build the satellites on top?


American, United and their best friends will need T5 for customs, and in many cases, departures until the new Terminal 2 is fully up and running.


Agreed for arrivals, but that is what they do now. As for departures, they depart from any gate with a passport check, so they don't need T5 for departures if their gate counts don't change much. Which it won't if UA doesn't move until Satellite 2 is done, and AA gets the 3 extra stinger gates, and DL gates when DL goes to T5.


Didn't mean AA and UA departures - departures for Star Alliance and OneWorld carriers.

Also, in all the reading I've done regarding the new Terminal 2 - Global terminal, there's no text stating *all* Star Alliance and One World carriers will be moving over.
if assumptions could fly, airliners.net would be the world's busiest airport
 
TTailedTiger
Posts: 1249
Joined: Sun Aug 26, 2018 5:19 am

Re: Delta & O’Hare 21

Mon Dec 17, 2018 11:13 pm

Midwestindy wrote:
TTailedTiger wrote:
Midwestindy wrote:

Southwest’s route to Chicago Midway has resulted in 66 percent more capacity in the market and put heavy downward pressure on yields. According to OAG’s DOT Analyser, average yields in CVG-ORD market prior to Southwest starting service from Midway were around U.S.₵ 80. Since then, airlines operating CVG-ORD have reduced yields to around U.S.₵ 40-50 while Southwest is operating with yields on CVG-MDW of U.S.₵ 35.

With the gate constraints in ORD, no hub on either end, and the route operated mostly by CR2s, I don't see how it remains much longer and would be surprised if it was profitable at this point.


Delta still flys from CVG to much smaller markets than ORD. They still fly to BDL once a day... There's no way they are giving up Chicago with the amount of frequent flyer and corporate contracts they have in the Cincinnati area. You have absolutely no evidence to backup such a claim.


If you would like to read through what I wrote, I outlined multiple reasons why DL would cut the route using reason and statistics.

CVG-BDL is a red herring in this discussion


No, what you posted was nothing more than conjecture. If ORD was losing money it would already be gone. Delta isn't shy about pulling money losing routes unless it involves SEA or BOS. And it's no secret that those from IND have quite a bit against CVG. You certainly don't seem to be the exception...
 
jcwr56
Posts: 902
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 11:36 am

Re: Delta & O’Hare 21

Mon Dec 17, 2018 11:16 pm

yeogeo wrote:
blockski wrote:
...it's plausible that the new satellite could open first (attached to the existing satellite) and thus UA moves their T2 flights to the satellite, AA moves with the other airlines to an expanded T5 while the existing T2 is demolished...


No, you don't have it quite right. AA stays put in T-3; AA has nothing to do with T-2 now and therefore the demolition of that terminal will not affect it. UA stays in T-1 and its B&C gates. After the T-5 revamp, next on the docket is Satellite 2, the western-most one (left side of illustration) which is where AC and UA RJ's will move to, then follows the T-2 demolition. The only carriers that must occupy T-5 while the so-called Global Terminal is constructed are international arrivals of AA & UA plus their international partners. The Global Terminal with FIS for AA/UA and partners will be in two parts: the Y-shaped structure on the site of T-2 AND the first satellite (Sat 1).

jagraham wrote:
The article says Satellite 2 (furthest west) will be done first, so UA can vacate T2 so it can be demolished and the Global Terminal built.
So UA will move to Satellite 2 and will not be a factor in T5.
Apparently AA gets another 3 stinger gates also; that combined with UA moving directly into Satellite 1 should keep UA and AA out of T5.

Exactly - except for AA/UA's int'l arrivals.


Preferential gates will be reviewed on an annual basis starting in April 2021. Everyone needs to understand, T1 does not equal UA, T3 does not equal AA. In its' simplest terms you have preferential gates and common use gates airport wide. It's also known not every Star and Oneworld will be housed at the OGT. In the ordinance, both UA and AA have to declare which carriers they want to have on their preferential gates. If they don't declare, they'll be placed on common use gates.

The 3 new stinger gates should become common use once they're built. You very well could have both Preferential and common use gates at the OGT.

The new agreement lends to increasing access and competition, not restricting it.
 
User avatar
Midwestindy
Posts: 4011
Joined: Sun Mar 12, 2017 3:56 am

Re: Delta & O’Hare 21

Mon Dec 17, 2018 11:49 pm

TTailedTiger wrote:
Midwestindy wrote:
TTailedTiger wrote:

Delta still flys from CVG to much smaller markets than ORD. They still fly to BDL once a day... There's no way they are giving up Chicago with the amount of frequent flyer and corporate contracts they have in the Cincinnati area. You have absolutely no evidence to backup such a claim.


If you would like to read through what I wrote, I outlined multiple reasons why DL would cut the route using reason and statistics.

CVG-BDL is a red herring in this discussion


No, what you posted was nothing more than conjecture. If ORD was losing money it would already be gone.


Same thing was said about XNA, MKE, and BNA. As I pointed out, yields (and even LFs) have gone down drastically in recent years, and with DL using more CR2s instead of CR9s (which are aircraft with much higher CASM), profit on the route has undoubtedly shrunk.

TTailedTiger wrote:
And it's no secret that those from IND have quite a bit against CVG. You certainly don't seem to be the exception...

You are assuming a lot here
1. I'm not from IND, I'm from Chicago, but I currently spend most of my time in Indy
2. Never met anyone from IND who had anything against CVG, most Indy people have beef with Chicago or Columbus
2a. My extended family is from Cincinnati, and my aunt used to work as a gate agent for DL in CVG, so I don't have anything against air service from CVG

This is an aviation forum, air service reductions/additions are not things you should take so personally
Status for 2019/2020: AAdvantage Platinum, Delta Gold, Southwest A-List
 
Fargo
Posts: 810
Joined: Fri Sep 21, 2018 3:00 am

Re: Delta & O’Hare 21

Tue Dec 18, 2018 2:12 am

deltal1011man wrote:
Adding something like ORD-AUS doesn't benefit the network and would be a dumpster fire.


ORD-AUS would only happen if DL puts a focus city/hub in AUS. As a stand alone p2p route, I agree it would be a dumpster fire.

I think LAX is the only logical add for the time being.
 
User avatar
yeogeo
Topic Author
Posts: 1171
Joined: Sun Jul 26, 2009 2:47 pm

Re: Delta & O’Hare 21

Tue Dec 18, 2018 2:35 am

jcwr56 wrote:
Preferential gates will be reviewed on an annual basis starting in April 2021. Everyone needs to understand, T1 does not equal UA, T3 does not equal AA. In its' simplest terms you have preferential gates and common use gates airport wide. It's also known not every Star and Oneworld will be housed at the OGT. In the ordinance, both UA and AA have to declare which carriers they want to have on their preferential gates. If they don't declare, they'll be placed on common use gates...You very well could have both Preferential and common use gates at the OGT.

This is barely relevant to this thread but I might be allowed a slight diversion: this common use mixing with preferred gate thing: It's a concept which will take some time to get used to. Pardon my ignorance, but is this a system in use in the US elsewhere? Won't it lead to smaller carriers having to jump around from terminal to terminal or are they assigned even common use gates for a longish period of time?

stlgph wrote:
...in all the reading I've done regarding the new Terminal 2 - Global terminal, there's no text stating *all* Star Alliance and One World carriers will be moving over.

No, you're right in that. It's just not known yet who those O'Hare Global Terminal tenants will be (well, I'd have some guesses). What I should have said that all the Star and OneWorld members are candidates for the OGT.
 
deltal1011man
Posts: 5332
Joined: Mon Sep 19, 2005 9:17 am

Re: Delta & O’Hare 21

Tue Dec 18, 2018 2:41 am

Fargo wrote:
deltal1011man wrote:
Adding something like ORD-AUS doesn't benefit the network and would be a dumpster fire.


ORD-AUS would only happen if DL puts a focus city/hub in AUS. As a stand alone p2p route, I agree it would be a dumpster fire.

I think LAX is the only logical add for the time being.

I would agree with that. Logically if Delta opens up another hub they would probably add ORD.

I'm just not sure I'm biting on the AUS hub thing.
 
Fargo
Posts: 810
Joined: Fri Sep 21, 2018 3:00 am

Re: Delta & O’Hare 21

Tue Dec 18, 2018 2:54 am

deltal1011man wrote:
Fargo wrote:
deltal1011man wrote:
Adding something like ORD-AUS doesn't benefit the network and would be a dumpster fire.


ORD-AUS would only happen if DL puts a focus city/hub in AUS. As a stand alone p2p route, I agree it would be a dumpster fire.

I think LAX is the only logical add for the time being.

I would agree with that. Logically if Delta opens up another hub they would probably add ORD.

I'm just not sure I'm biting on the AUS hub thing.


Yeah, I don't know either. Even though I think it makes sense on one hand, given the pathetically weak Delta/SkyTeam coverage in Texas (a rather significant market), does Delta really want to go to battle on a third front while they are still duking it out in SEA/BOS? I have no idea. Delta is really unpredictable in that area.
 
jagraham
Posts: 862
Joined: Sun Jul 17, 2016 11:10 pm

Re: Delta & O’Hare 21

Tue Dec 18, 2018 3:00 am

deltal1011man wrote:
jagraham wrote:
Fargo wrote:
My prediction:

DL will move to T5, build a much bigger and state-of-the-art SkyClub, cut CVG, put the A220 on LGA when they get more of them, add LAX and maybe AUS if DL puts a hub/focus city there.

That’s it.

There will be no DL p2p flying (domestic or international) out of ORD because they’d get clobbered yield wise and it would hurt DTW/MSP too much.


LAX is the biggest hole and it is a hub. Plus a couple of timed departures and arrivals will help Skyteam compete with the ME3 (no point in transferring in the US if the ME3 takes you directly to 8 cities). It does not have to be a lot of capacity; 717s or A220s will do.

I could make a case for some p2p flying to keep medallions on DL, but DL has higher priorities. Especially with the MD80s going away in the short term.

I have no idea how Delta adding ORD-LAX has anything to do with the ME3? If Delta adds that route it will be for LAX O&D and maybe to feed places like SYD and Hawaii.
No one is going to connect in ORD on a ST flight from LA.
Also if Delta does LAX-ORD it would have to be on 220s or 32S/737s. The E75 and 717s don't have the legs to do the flight. As the 220 fleet builds I expect Delta to give LAX a shot with 3-4 daily. It will be a blood bath though.
.


DL adding ORD-LAX would be about people transferring in LAX. And not having to transfer twice to get to someplace like Chicago.
DL has a similar problem with Houston and Washington and Miami, although I don't think that's quite as acute at this time.
 
User avatar
compensateme
Posts: 3279
Joined: Wed Jan 28, 2009 4:17 am

Re: Delta & O’Hare 21

Tue Dec 18, 2018 3:04 am

Ah, our monthly installment of ‘DL ORD expansion.’

Chicago is a stagnant LOCAL air market (do not confuse this with the mostly long-haul adds that have been added to take advantage of the incumbent hubs); most of its growth in recent years has been at the LCC level. Reality is, if DL wants to expand at ORD, it’s going to have to ‘steal’ market share from AA, UA and WN.

And given these carriers (a) dominate the Chicago POS contracts that matter, (b) have vested millions into their loyalty programs, (c) can offer frequency that DL will never be able to match, (d) can operate larger, lower CASM aircraft and (e) have the advantage of large hubs... that’s not going to be an easy task.

DL May add flights and capacity to its hubs, and link ORD to markets where it’s trying to build focus cities (LAX, RDU, etc.)... but that’s it. Anybody holding out for a large scale DL expansion is going to be sorely disappointed.

Put simply, there’s too many other markets where it could receive a better return for its investment.
We don’t care what your next flight is.
 
Fargo
Posts: 810
Joined: Fri Sep 21, 2018 3:00 am

Re: Delta & O’Hare 21

Tue Dec 18, 2018 3:18 am

compensateme wrote:
Ah, our monthly installment of ‘DL ORD expansion.’

Chicago is a stagnant LOCAL air market (do not confuse this with the mostly long-haul adds that have been added to take advantage of the incumbent hubs); most of its growth in recent years has been at the LCC level. Reality is, if DL wants to expand at ORD, it’s going to have to ‘steal’ market share from AA, UA and WN.

And given these carriers (a) dominate the Chicago POS contracts that matter, (b) have vested millions into their loyalty programs, (c) can offer frequency that DL will never be able to match, (d) can operate larger, lower CASM aircraft and (e) have the advantage of large hubs... that’s not going to be an easy task.

DL May add flights and capacity to its hubs, and link ORD to markets where it’s trying to build focus cities (LAX, RDU, etc.)... but that’s it. Anybody holding out for a large scale DL expansion is going to be sorely disappointed.

Put simply, there’s too many other markets where it could receive a better return for its investment.


In fairness, the local air market hasn't been completely stagnant. AA has been adding a fair amount of new destinations lately.

But I agree, DL has no need to expand ORD beyond becoming a complete spoke (i.e, service to all it's hubs and focus cities). If you want to fly DL so bad, there are two great hubs up the road in DTW/MSP that can get you to where you want. This isn't Los Angeles or New York, Chicago can barely support 3 hub carriers as it is.
 
jcwr56
Posts: 902
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 11:36 am

Re: Delta & O’Hare 21

Tue Dec 18, 2018 10:41 am

yeogeo wrote:
jcwr56 wrote:
Preferential gates will be reviewed on an annual basis starting in April 2021. Everyone needs to understand, T1 does not equal UA, T3 does not equal AA. In its' simplest terms you have preferential gates and common use gates airport wide. It's also known not every Star and Oneworld will be housed at the OGT. In the ordinance, both UA and AA have to declare which carriers they want to have on their preferential gates. If they don't declare, they'll be placed on common use gates...You very well could have both Preferential and common use gates at the OGT.

This is barely relevant to this thread but I might be allowed a slight diversion: this common use mixing with preferred gate thing: It's a concept which will take some time to get used to. Pardon my ignorance, but is this a system in use in the US elsewhere? Won't it lead to smaller carriers having to jump around from terminal to terminal or are they assigned even common use gates for a longish period of time?

stlgph wrote:
...in all the reading I've done regarding the new Terminal 2 - Global terminal, there's no text stating *all* Star Alliance and One World carriers will be moving over.

No, you're right in that. It's just not known yet who those O'Hare Global Terminal tenants will be (well, I'd have some guesses). What I should have said that all the Star and OneWorld members are candidates for the OGT.


Actually, it means ANY carrier could be shuffled around on a seasonal basis between terminals. There's nothing preventing UA or AA being assigned to common use gates in any of the terminals if they can't self gate on their own preferential. Just as any carrier can be gated on a preferential gate if an accommodation request is made.

As construction starts, you'll see changes to where airlines are gated. There's no choice in the matter.

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