Welcome to Chicago Aviation Thread - 2020. Please continue to add your comments below

Link to last thread

viewtopic.php?f=3&t=1411825

Happy New Year everyone!
I thought we could start the Chicago Av Thread with a look to what we're most anticipating at Chicago Area airports in 2020.

A few off the top of my head for O'Hare:
•The ATS: finish the damn thing already!
•The commissioning of 9C/27C
•Flights to Brisbane!
more?

Help me out with Midway; what do we have to look forward there?

yeogeo wrote:

Help me out with Midway; what do we have to look forward there?

I have mentioned that the lack of WN MDW-RIC nonstop service is a huge hole in WN's network due to (a) RIC having higher PDEW's out of Chicago than a few domestic destinations that are currently served out of both MDW and ORD on AA, UA, and WN, (b) RIC lacking 1-stop connecting service on WN to some destinations that have 1-stop connecting service to almost all of the other WN stations in the contiguous U.S. on WN, and (c) RIC carrying more domestic passengers than a few contiguous U.S. airports that already have nonstop service to MDW on WN.

I have also mentioned that the lack of MDW-RIC nonstop service on WN needs to be addressed by WN once WN has more planes in its fleet as the lack of WN RIC-MDW nonstop service is a bigger hole than most of the WN nonstop routes that have been recently dropped or seen frequency reductions as a result of the 737 MAX grounding.

A more detailed discussion relating to the lack of WN MDW-RIC nonstop service and PDEW's on CHI-RIC can be found at https://www.airliners.net/forum/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=1412069&start=400#p21600201, https://www.airliners.net/forum/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=1437991#p21893955, and https://www.airliners.net/forum/posting.php?mode=quote&f=3&p=21894139.

While WN will not be serving BOI, GSP, GEG, or TUL nonstop from MDW in Summer 2020, WN re-adding MDW-BOI, MDW-GSP, MDW-GEG, and MDW-TUL nonstop service on a summer seasonal basis in Summer 2021 might be a possibility as WN had been able to fill MDW-BOI, MDW-GSP, MDW-GEG, and MDW-TUL nonstop flights during the summertime in the past.

Here were the load factors for MDW-BOI/GSP/GEG/TUL back in the last summer travel season that WN operated these routes:
MDW-BOI in Summer 2018 - 87.71%
MDW-GSP in Summer 2015 - 81.06%
MDW-GEG in Summer 2018 - 86.46%
MDW-TUL in Summer 2015 - 88.56%

In addition to MDW-RIC or the return of MDW-BOI/GSP/GEG/TUL, there has also been some discussion of WN possibly adding MDW-COS nonstop service in the Airliners.net forums.

I had also mentioned in a previous post that WN was considering adding service to ANC with ANC being the only remaining destination in the top 50 U.S. markets that isn't currently served by WN, and that post can be found at https://www.airliners.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=1412069&start=50#p21075859.

WN adding MDW-ANC nonstop service is a possibility if WN enters the ANC market since (a) MDW-ANC is within the range of the Boeing 737-700 and 737-800, (b) AA, UA, and AS all already operate 737-800 aircraft on the ORD-ANC nonstop route, and (c) WN would be able to offer 1-stop connections to ANC from most of WN's domestic destinations east of the Mississippi River through MDW if WN adds MDW-ANC nonstop service.

I think we are going to be hard pressed to see too much on the SWA expansion front until the MAX situation is resolved and the planes are back in service.

Just curious what's the latest update on the ATS? The bus idea seemed like a disaster from the beginning.

Seems Ethiopian has gone triple seven.
From Dec 1 to Jan 1 (23 r/ts), ET575 has operated the 77L 16 times, with 5 788 & two 789 roundtrips.


^^An ET 77L departing ORD on Dec 21.
Note the AA#383 767 in background above, which makes me wonder,
is this the year when our one-wing finds a way off the field?

I'll kind of miss her when she's gone, but we've known her sitting out there going on 4 years now, so... ?

9w748capt wrote:

Just curious what's the latest update on the ATS? The bus idea seemed like a disaster from the beginning.

The update is that there isn't one; last I heard was "early 2020", announced some months ago.
The "bus idea" was really the CDA's only option when it became clear that a total, lengthy shutdown was necessary.

yeogeo wrote:

Help me out with Midway; what do we have to look forward there?

Happy New Years guys! Much to look forward to around Chicagoland in 2020, and looking forward to this thread for all the latest hot gossip.

Good stuff happening at MDW, as most of the MMP has been on track and I think, fingers crossed, should be completed by year's end. The security checkpoint estimate is "Winter 2020," so certainly some wiggle room there.

Gotta give props to CDA: they have done a good job posting regular, thorough updates and photos of their construction progress. Even writing a monthly newsletter that is generally prompt.

Happy to see that MDW is getting numerous "soft" updates to common areas: lighting, HVAC, fixtures etc. Should be a nice look when all finished.

https://www.flychicago.com/sites/midway ... fault.aspx

https://www.flychicago.com/sites/midway ... sions.aspx

https://www.flychicago.com/sites/midway ... r_2019.pdf

midway7 wrote:

I think we are going to be hard pressed to see too much on the SWA expansion front until the MAX situation is resolved and the planes are back in service.

100% agree there. Infrastructure limitations aside, I think this has been the biggest drag on MDW pax growth this past year, hands down.

yeogeo wrote:

9w748capt wrote:

Just curious what's the latest update on the ATS? The bus idea seemed like a disaster from the beginning.

The update is that there isn't one; last I heard was "early 2020", announced some months ago.
The "bus idea" was really the CDA's only option when it became clear that a total, lengthy shutdown was necessary.

Absolute joke. They could have built an entire new ATS system by now. No reason whatsoever that an existing train track needed almost two full years (will be by May) for "modernization". The CDA and Parsons Construction have spent more time in litigation then they have on construction. The ONLY saving grace of this whole debacle has been the Terminal Transfer Bus (TTB) that operates between T5 and gates Gate B1, G17,K20, and L24. The fact there has been no ATS for two full summers, and passengers are forced onto VERY old, loud, and polluting buses is an embarrassment of epic proportions to ORD . Hearing the ATS will re-open on February 10, but I will believe it when I see it. If this is any indication of "modernization" then I can only imagine how long the expansion of T5 will take, which ironically is already behind schedule. Don't even get me started on the Global Terminal project. On top of all that, ORD experienced stagnant growth this past year.

https://www.chicagobusiness.com/transpo ... -gut-check

I thought ORD was also getting a direct flight to TLV with EL AL?

icareflies wrote:

I thought ORD was also getting a direct flight to TLV with EL AL?

Yes, beginning in March, 3 days a week.

What is going on with a BA B744 that is standing at T5 pad? Saw her today when was on the way to catch UA B78X. Anyone?

Qantas really is prompting the new Brisbane flights: today I saw that they've taken out ads on every billboard/signage along the train platform at the Clark/Lake el stop.

So I got to snooping around the website, and oddly enough, the flight information section for this route says there is a stop-over in LA or San Francisco? And that journey time is 20hrs+. What's this all about??


"Chicago to Brisbane flight information

Our flight paths to Brisbane start from 20 hours and 5 minutes. A baggage allowance is included for every passenger, as well as a great selection of inflight entertainment in every seat.

ORD to BNE

Flights from Chicago to Brisbane stopover in Los Angeles or San Francisco. For information on your flight, ask a member of the cabin crew on board or check the terminal screens on arrival."

Source: https://www.qantas.com/us/en/flight-dea ... omy/lowest

gabik001 wrote:

What is going on with a BA B744 that is standing at T5 pad? Saw her today when was on the way to catch UA B78X. Anyone?

FR24 lists Jan 1's BA294 ORD>LHR (with G-BYGG) as "unknown" and never departed... mechanical?

ORDfan wrote:

Qantas really is prompting the new Brisbane flights: today I saw that they've taken out ads on every billboard/signage along the train platform at the Clark/Lake el stop. So I got to snooping around the website, and oddly enough, the flight information section for this route says there is a stop-over in LA or San Francisco? And that journey time is 20hrs+. What's this all about??

Well, I suppose if you want to get to BNE with them before April 20th when the non-stop flights begin they won't turn you away, but you'll have to stop in LAX or SFO.

I'm guessing it's worth it for them to get their name and destination out there well in advance.

yeogeo wrote:

gabik001 wrote:

ORDfan wrote:

Qantas really is prompting the new Brisbane flights: today I saw that they've taken out ads on every billboard/signage along the train platform at the Clark/Lake el stop. So I got to snooping around the website, and oddly enough, the flight information section for this route says there is a stop-over in LA or San Francisco? And that journey time is 20hrs+. What's this all about??

Well, I suppose if you want to get to BNE with them before April 20th when the non-stop flights begin they won't turn you away, but you'll have to stop in LAX or SFO.

I'm guessing it's worth it for them to get their name and destination out there well in advance.

Well there's no QF flights originating in ORD currently to stopover in the first place. So it's strange to dedicate a page for Chicago-Brisbane if its destined to be a codeshare. Also, if you look at the dates (and fares) that they are promoting (April 17th onwards), it's clear they are promoting what is supposed to be the non-stop ORD-BNE.

I'd think they would mention the non-stop flight information.

ORDfan wrote:

yeogeo wrote:

gabik001 wrote:

Well, I suppose if you want to get to BNE with them before April 20th when the non-stop flights begin they won't turn you away, but you'll have to stop in LAX or SFO.

I'm guessing it's worth it for them to get their name and destination out there well in advance.

Well there's no QF flights originating in ORD currently to stopover in the first place. So it's strange to dedicate a page for Chicago-Brisbane if its destined to be a codeshare. Also, if you look at the dates (and fares) that they are promoting (April 17th onwards), it's clear they are promoting what is supposed to be the non-stop ORD-BNE.

I'd think they would mention the non-stop flight information.

I realize there are no QF flights to ORD as yet, but I'm sure they'd be happy to fly you to their gateways in the west with their partner in OneWorld, American.

I don't know this but perhaps the non-stops have not been offered for sale yet? There's no point in advertising non-stops before they can sell them to you (if that is indeed the case).

I think you're reading too much in this; they want to get the Qantas name out there and Chicagoans familiar with it and the city of Brisbane, no?

airstatdfw wrote:

yeogeo wrote:

Still curious how this work on 4R/22L will be accommodated.

A few years ago they did the same project to 27L/9R. At night they would close the Rwy and do sections until they were complete.

Confirmed in today's email from the CDA:
"AECOM HUNT CLAYCO JV has been tasked with rehabilitating Runway 4R-22L. Generally, the rehabilitation includes replacement of the asphalt surface, pavement crack repair, electrical rehabilitation, demolition of select existing pavements and restoration. This project is located within the Airport Operations Area and will be completed during nighttime hours."

In a slew of emails this morning the CDA published bid opportunities for the Terminal 5 addition.

“Notice Date:
Thursday, January 2, 2019

#04 Earth Retention
#05 Structural Steel
#06 Conveyance (Design Assist)
#07 Metal Panels (Design Assist)
#08 Aluminum Curtainwall, Glass, Glazing (Design Assist)
#09 Re-gasketing all existing Curtainwall
#10 Temporary Structure
#11 Apron Paving
#12 Site Electrical
#13 Site Utilities
#14 Earthwork/Excavation/Demo
#15 Concrete Foundations & Flatwork
#16 Waterproofing
#17 Asphalt Paving
#18 Fireproofing
#19 General Contractor (No MEPFp)
#20 Mechanical (Design Assist)
#21 Plumbing (Design Assist)
#22 Fire Protection (Design Assist)
#23 Electrical (Design Assist)
#24 Building Automated Systems (BAS)/Special Systems (Design Assist)

Revised Prequalification Information Due:
Thursday, January 16, 2020 @ 11:00AM

Mark all inquiries "T-5 O'Hare 21 at O'Hare International Airport BP ##" in the Subject Line…”

More from the CDA today....

jplatts wrote:

yeogeo wrote:

Help me out with Midway; what do we have to look forward there?

WN adding MDW-ANC nonstop service is a possibility if WN enters the ANC market since (a) MDW-ANC is within the range of the Boeing 737-700 and 737-800, (b) AA, UA, and AS all already operate 737-800 aircraft on the ORD-ANC nonstop route, and (c) WN would be able to offer 1-stop connections to ANC from most of WN's domestic destinations east of the Mississippi River through MDW if WN adds MDW-ANC nonstop service.

If it were to happen, it would be Southwest's longest flight, I believe.

Maps generated by the Great Circle Mapper - copyright © Karl L. Swartz.

piedmontf284000 wrote:

yeogeo wrote:

9w748capt wrote:

Just curious what's the latest update on the ATS? The bus idea seemed like a disaster from the beginning.

The update is that there isn't one; last I heard was "early 2020", announced some months ago.
The "bus idea" was really the CDA's only option when it became clear that a total, lengthy shutdown was necessary.

Absolute joke. They could have built an entire new ATS system by now. No reason whatsoever that an existing train track needed almost two full years (will be by May) for "modernization". The CDA and Parsons Construction have spent more time in litigation then they have on construction. The ONLY saving grace of this whole debacle has been the Terminal Transfer Bus (TTB) that operates between T5 and gates Gate B1, G17,K20, and L24. The fact there has been no ATS for two full summers, and passengers are forced onto VERY old, loud, and polluting buses is an embarrassment of epic proportions to ORD . Hearing the ATS will re-open on February 10, but I will believe it when I see it. If this is any indication of "modernization" then I can only imagine how long the expansion of T5 will take, which ironically is already behind schedule. Don't even get me started on the Global Terminal project. On top of all that, ORD experienced stagnant growth this past year.

https://www.chicagobusiness.com/transpo ... -gut-check

Honestly, I don't think the shuttle buses are that bad. They got off to a rough start, but they've added so much capacity since May 18, wait times are down to a few minutes. As of today, a spokeswoman for CDA confirms 1st half of this year:

https://www.bizjournals.com/chicago/new ... -year.html

As of October, pax growth is +1.52% on the year. The Crains piece is sensationalist, and it was a bit early to call 2019. Is it high growth? No. But for such a mature market amid a mature/aging economic cycle, it's not stagnant. A busy holiday season should see that closer to ~2.0%, which is just under long-term historical averages.

yeogeo wrote:

ORDfan wrote:

yeogeo wrote:

Well there's no QF flights originating in ORD currently to stopover in the first place. So it's strange to dedicate a page for Chicago-Brisbane if its destined to be a codeshare. Also, if you look at the dates (and fares) that they are promoting (April 17th onwards), it's clear they are promoting what is supposed to be the non-stop ORD-BNE.

I'd think they would mention the non-stop flight information.

I realize there are no QF flights to ORD as yet, but I'm sure they'd be happy to fly you to their gateways in the west with their partner in OneWorld, American.

I don't know this but perhaps the non-stops have not been offered for sale yet? There's no point in advertising non-stops before they can sell them to you (if that is indeed the case).

I think you're reading too much in this; they want to get the Qantas name out there and Chicagoans familiar with it and the city of Brisbane, no?

I'm just looking at it like a non-avgeek. I'd love to see this route be long-term successful, but for anyone on the platform who went to qantas.com like I did: I'm sure some of them are also scratching their head. I don't know how to post pics here, but the ads are promoting the non-stop: IIRC, I believe one of them says 'just a hop away,' or something to the effect.

If they default the flights to April 17th in the search menu (which they do), they should definitely be listing the non-stop flight info: departure/arrival times, days offers, flight time, etc. Like Air NZ did when they launched.

If I'm confused at the schedule and flight info - no doubt some non-avgeek tourists are as well. If they are going to promote a trip to Australia, with a layover in SFO or LAX, they could've been doing that for years before launching Brisbane.

yeogeo wrote:

More from the CDA today....

I'm borrowing a CDA presentation image posted by CleSyrRoc in the 2019 thread that illustrates the A/B replacement projects.



The "East-West Advance Work", mentioned in the bid opportunity above I believe would be the smaller orange section shown east of the larger North-South one. It erases the southern-most portion of former runway 14R/32L.

ORDfan wrote:

yeogeo wrote:

ORDfan wrote:

Well there's no QF flights originating in ORD currently to stopover in the first place. So it's strange to dedicate a page for Chicago-Brisbane if its destined to be a codeshare. Also, if you look at the dates (and fares) that they are promoting (April 17th onwards), it's clear they are promoting what is supposed to be the non-stop ORD-BNE.

I'd think they would mention the non-stop flight information.

I realize there are no QF flights to ORD as yet, but I'm sure they'd be happy to fly you to their gateways in the west with their partner in OneWorld, American.

I don't know this but perhaps the non-stops have not been offered for sale yet? There's no point in advertising non-stops before they can sell them to you (if that is indeed the case).

I think you're reading too much in this; they want to get the Qantas name out there and Chicagoans familiar with it and the city of Brisbane, no?

I'm just looking at it like a non-avgeek. I'd love to see this route be long-term successful, but for anyone on the platform who went to qantas.com like I did: I'm sure some of them are also scratching their head. I don't know how to post pics here, but the ads are promoting the non-stop: IIRC, I believe one of them says 'just a hop away,' or something to the effect.

If they default the flights to April 17th in the search menu (which they do), they should definitely be listing the non-stop flight info: departure/arrival times, days offers, flight time, etc. Like Air NZ did when they launched.

If I'm confused at the schedule and flight info - no doubt some non-avgeek tourists are as well. If they are going to promote a trip to Australia, with a layover in SFO or LAX, they could've been doing that for years before launching Brisbane.

Non-Stop Service between ORD and BNE (Flights 85 & 86) is still subject to government approval, this is why it is not showing on their website.

yeogeo wrote:

jplatts wrote:

yeogeo wrote:

Help me out with Midway; what do we have to look forward there?

WN adding MDW-ANC nonstop service is a possibility if WN enters the ANC market since (a) MDW-ANC is within the range of the Boeing 737-700 and 737-800, (b) AA, UA, and AS all already operate 737-800 aircraft on the ORD-ANC nonstop route, and (c) WN would be able to offer 1-stop connections to ANC from most of WN's domestic destinations east of the Mississippi River through MDW if WN adds MDW-ANC nonstop service.

If it were to happen, it would be Southwest's longest flight, I believe.

Maps generated by the Great Circle Mapper - copyright © Karl L. Swartz.

Can a 737-800 takeoff from MDW bound for ANC? I didn’t think WN had any SFP 800s in their fleet.

Personally, I'm just happy to see all of DL's LGA-ORD shuttle flights running as mainline. So much nicer!

kordcj wrote:

Can a 737-800 takeoff from MDW bound for ANC? I didn’t think WN had any SFP 800s in their fleet.

MDW-ANC is within 250 mi of an diversion airport that can handle Boeing 737 aircraft, whereas WN's California to Hawaii nonstop flights are more than 1,000 miles from a diversion airport at the halfway point. There are also airports airports in Alaska, British Columbia, Alberta, Saskatchewan, Manitoba, North Dakota, Minnesota, and Wisconsin that MDW-ANC nonstop flights can divert to, whereas diversions on California to Hawaii nonstop flights either require turning back around to the state of departure or continuing towards the state of the destination.

I have mentioned that AA, AS, and UA all operate 737-800's on ORD-ANC nonstop flights. WN's 737-700 and 737-800 planes are probably capable of doing MDW-ANC nonstop flights with the 737-700 having slightly longer range than the 737-800 and with WN planning on operating SAN-HNL nonstop flights (which is only 247 miles shorter than MDW-ANC) on 737-800 planes.

Both OGG and LIH have shorter runways than most of the other airports served by WN, and WN also already operates nonstop flights longer than MDW-SFO out of OGG. WN will also be starting nonstop flights to OAK and SJC from LIH next month. MDW's longest runway (13C/31C) probably can handle nonstop departures to ANC on a 737-700 or 737-800 if OGG and LIH can handle nonstop departures to California on a 737-800.

AA also already operates 777's on its OGG-DFW nonstop route, even with OGG's longest runway being only slightly longer than MDW's longest runway.

piedmontf284000 wrote:

ORDfan wrote:

yeogeo wrote:

I realize there are no QF flights to ORD as yet, but I'm sure they'd be happy to fly you to their gateways in the west with their partner in OneWorld, American.

I don't know this but perhaps the non-stops have not been offered for sale yet? There's no point in advertising non-stops before they can sell them to you (if that is indeed the case).

I think you're reading too much in this; they want to get the Qantas name out there and Chicagoans familiar with it and the city of Brisbane, no?

I'm just looking at it like a non-avgeek. I'd love to see this route be long-term successful, but for anyone on the platform who went to qantas.com like I did: I'm sure some of them are also scratching their head. I don't know how to post pics here, but the ads are promoting the non-stop: IIRC, I believe one of them says 'just a hop away,' or something to the effect.

If they default the flights to April 17th in the search menu (which they do), they should definitely be listing the non-stop flight info: departure/arrival times, days offers, flight time, etc. Like Air NZ did when they launched.

If I'm confused at the schedule and flight info - no doubt some non-avgeek tourists are as well. If they are going to promote a trip to Australia, with a layover in SFO or LAX, they could've been doing that for years before launching Brisbane.

Non-Stop Service between ORD and BNE (Flights 85 & 86) is still subject to government approval, this is why it is not showing on their website.

Great point - did not know that. They must be very confident though if they are laying out the ad campaign already.

evank516 wrote:

Personally, I'm just happy to see all of DL's LGA-ORD shuttle flights running as mainline. So much nicer!

I totally missed that.... When did that happen? Don't get me wrong: I'm happy for the upguage and added seats, not to mention all the extra 717s flying around, but I'm not sure if mainline DL is that much nicer than DL Connection E175s - that type is my favorite narrowbody, a great fit for the jump to LGA. Is the 717 that much nicer? The idea of an extra seat to climb over on the 3 abreast side makes it a less than ideal, IMO. Although, I will say, the A220 was a great experience, regardless.

yeogeo wrote:

yeogeo wrote:

More from the CDA today....

I'm borrowing a CDA presentation image posted by CleSyrRoc in the 2019 thread that illustrates the A/B replacement projects.



The "East-West Advance Work", mentioned in the bid opportunity above I believe would be the smaller orange section shown east of the larger North-South one. It erases the southern-most portion of former runway 14R/32L.

The proposed north-south taxiway looks kinda far east to my eye. Is there really enough room there for two more satellites? Maybe the first one which will be attached to C, but it doesn't look like there'd be room for the apron on the 2nd satellite in that graphic.

ORDfan wrote:

yeogeo wrote:

yeogeo wrote:

More from the CDA today....

I'm borrowing a CDA presentation image posted by CleSyrRoc in the 2019 thread that illustrates the A/B replacement projects.



The "East-West Advance Work", mentioned in the bid opportunity above I believe would be the smaller orange section shown east of the larger North-South one. It erases the southern-most portion of former runway 14R/32L.

The proposed north-south taxiway looks kinda far east to my eye. Is there really enough room there for two more satellites? Maybe the first one which will be attached to C, but it doesn't look like there'd be room for the apron on the 2nd satellite in that graphic.

There is room for both, including a taxilane west of Satellite 2.

ORDfan wrote:

piedmontf284000 wrote:

ORDfan wrote:

I'm just looking at it like a non-avgeek. I'd love to see this route be long-term successful, but for anyone on the platform who went to qantas.com like I did: I'm sure some of them are also scratching their head. I don't know how to post pics here, but the ads are promoting the non-stop: IIRC, I believe one of them says 'just a hop away,' or something to the effect.

If they default the flights to April 17th in the search menu (which they do), they should definitely be listing the non-stop flight info: departure/arrival times, days offers, flight time, etc. Like Air NZ did when they launched.

If I'm confused at the schedule and flight info - no doubt some non-avgeek tourists are as well. If they are going to promote a trip to Australia, with a layover in SFO or LAX, they could've been doing that for years before launching Brisbane.

Non-Stop Service between ORD and BNE (Flights 85 & 86) is still subject to government approval, this is why it is not showing on their website.

Great point - did not know that. They must be very confident though if they are laying out the ad campaign already.

evank516 wrote:

Personally, I'm just happy to see all of DL's LGA-ORD shuttle flights running as mainline. So much nicer!

I totally missed that.... When did that happen? Don't get me wrong: I'm happy for the upguage and added seats, not to mention all the extra 717s flying around, but I'm not sure if mainline DL is that much nicer than DL Connection E175s - that type is my favorite narrowbody, a great fit for the jump to LGA. Is the 717 that much nicer? The idea of an extra seat to climb over on the 3 abreast side makes it a less than ideal, IMO. Although, I will say, the A220 was a great experience, regardless.

Happened in 2019, so very recent. Things I do like about the 717 is the exit row, 21 A and F have no seat in front of them so the legroom is amazing! Also mainline flights are less likely to be cancelled over the RJs, and if you're flying between LGA and ORD, issues are likely.

evank516 wrote:

ORDfan wrote:

piedmontf284000 wrote:

Non-Stop Service between ORD and BNE (Flights 85 & 86) is still subject to government approval, this is why it is not showing on their website.

Great point - did not know that. They must be very confident though if they are laying out the ad campaign already.

evank516 wrote:

Personally, I'm just happy to see all of DL's LGA-ORD shuttle flights running as mainline. So much nicer!

I totally missed that.... When did that happen? Don't get me wrong: I'm happy for the upguage and added seats, not to mention all the extra 717s flying around, but I'm not sure if mainline DL is that much nicer than DL Connection E175s - that type is my favorite narrowbody, a great fit for the jump to LGA. Is the 717 that much nicer? The idea of an extra seat to climb over on the 3 abreast side makes it a less than ideal, IMO. Although, I will say, the A220 was a great experience, regardless.

Happened in 2019, so very recent. Things I do like about the 717 is the exit row, 21 A and F have no seat in front of them so the legroom is amazing! Also mainline flights are less likely to be cancelled over the RJs, and if you're flying between LGA and ORD, issues are likely.

UA is also going all mainline in S20. AA will be all 738, UA will be all 320/319 and DL all 717.

LOT will be leasing Air Belgium A-343's on its WAW-ORD flights beginning tomorrow (7 Jan) until at least the end of the month, presenting yet another rarity or two to watch for at O'Hare courtesy of the Polish airline.



https://www.routesonline.com/news/38/ai ... e-20200106

yeogeo wrote:

LOT will be leasing Air Belgium A-343's on its WAW-ORD flights beginning tomorrow (7 Jan) until at least the end of the month, presenting yet another rarity or two to watch for at O'Hare courtesy of the Polish airline.



https://www.routesonline.com/news/38/ai ... e-20200106

In the evening unfortunately.

Planeboy17 wrote:

yeogeo wrote:

LOT will be leasing Air Belgium A-343's on its WAW-ORD flights beginning tomorrow (7 Jan) until at least the end of the month, presenting yet another rarity or two to watch for at O'Hare courtesy of the Polish airline.



https://www.routesonline.com/news/38/ai ... e-20200106

In the evening unfortunately.

The author of the article says there's a good chance that these birds get leased through the summer...so maybe they'll get a shot to sub again when we get some more daylight back... let's hope at least!

Speaking of the MMP, looks like the city has decided not to expand the Midway garage after all. I have some fond memories of the Kiss N Fly from my days growing up on the South Side, so I'm glad to see it will exist once again.

Just wish the city hadn't tore up that lot in the first place, but I give them credit for saving that money if they think the expansion would be underutilized. Seems like some fair financial prudence on behalf of the treasurer's office, for a change.

https://www.chicagotribune.com/business ... story.html

My DL contacts say ORD-LAX is “in the works.” As a former DL intern, I would take that as legitimate. I can’t see thus happening until the move to T5 though.

Same with VS returning. Market is there, but yield isn’t there. Looking for a contract to seal the deal. UA is killing it with High J and AA has had to bring T7 back due to loss of premium traffic.

ORDfan wrote:

Planeboy17 wrote:

yeogeo wrote:

LOT will be leasing Air Belgium A-343's on its WAW-ORD flights beginning tomorrow (7 Jan) until at least the end of the month, presenting yet another rarity or two to watch for at O'Hare courtesy of the Polish airline.



https://www.routesonline.com/news/38/ai ... e-20200106

In the evening unfortunately.

The author of the article says there's a good chance that these birds get leased through the summer...so maybe they'll get a shot to sub again when we get some more daylight back... let's hope at least!

The wet lease with Air Belgium is thru October of this year, also possibly of LOT leasing 3 772ER staring in June/July for 3-5 years so might more sporting fun in Chicago.

nomorerjs wrote:

My DL contacts say ORD-LAX is “in the works.” As a former DL intern, I would take that as legitimate. I can’t see thus happening until the move to T5 though.

Same with VS returning. Market is there, but yield isn’t there. Looking for a contract to seal the deal. UA is killing it with High J and AA has had to bring T7 back due to loss of premium traffic.

Surprised DL doesn't already fly ORD-LAX, seems a like a big hole for them.

Does AA T7s have less premium seats than the 767s? I don't understand?

nomorerjs wrote:

My DL contacts say ORD-LAX is “in the works.” As a former DL intern, I would take that as legitimate. I can’t see thus happening until the move to T5 though.

Same with VS returning. Market is there, but yield isn’t there. Looking for a contract to seal the deal. UA is killing it with High J and AA has had to bring T7 back due to loss of premium traffic.

Very exciting rumor. I think it is inevitable. The real question is what the service will look like. With so much frequency from AA and UA I don’t think they can just do 2 or 3 a day. Maybe 5 like they did ORDBOS. Which makes sense they would wait for the move to T5

nomorerjs wrote:

My DL contacts say ORD-LAX is “in the works.” As a former DL intern, I would take that as legitimate. I can’t see thus happening until the move to T5 though.

Same with VS returning. Market is there, but yield isn’t there. Looking for a contract to seal the deal. UA is killing it with High J and AA has had to bring T7 back due to loss of premium traffic.

Would they be putting the A220 on that route, seems like long and thin would be the right aircraft to start out with.

IIRC, part of the problem with the ATS is that gauge of track for automated systems is no longer used. I don't know if gauge for new systems is wider or narrower, but I seem to recall that the City decided that trying to rebuild the existing track to a current gauge was exorbitant. So, you have a contractor working on a track gauge that is no longer used, and the City had to find a car manufacturer who could build cars for a gauge that is no longer used. (I seem to recall when the ATS was built that the car builder was a French company.)

I know enough about construction of large projects that they often don't finish on time, and that the project owner and the contractors wind up suing each other. A bridge a few miles from my house, over I-355, was closed to replace the bridge deck. By the time the project finished, 6 weeks late, the concrete was cracking. That means the bridge deck will need to be replaced next summer, after a winter with salt makes the cracks worse.

I've seen some assessments of why the ATS project spiraled out of control. Besides the gauge issue, pundits feel that the lack of professional management at the Department of Aviation contributed to the fiasco.

Is it embarrassing? Of course it is. Is this typical for Chicago? Very much so. There are a host of public works projects in the history of Chicago that were finished late, went over budget, and had problems later on. The rebuilding of the I-290/I-90 interchange near the old Post Office was supposed to finish in 2019. Now, they are pegging 2021 or 2022. There were underground problems (sewers, utilities, etc) that weren't anticipated. One building on the UIC campus developed structural issues that brought a portion of the project to a screeching halt.

This how things work in Chicago, or don't work.

What has people mad is that the City, rather than give any sort of date, even one that is ridiculously far out, now is mum on the completion date. The City ought to say that the ATS will be up and running for Thanksgiving, and then move up the date as it sees that progress was being made.

The truly frightening concern is how long the expansion of T5 will take, how long it will take to demolish and rebuild T2, and how long it will take to build out the extra concourse space in T1. If the terminal projects go as well as the ATS project, we still might be talking about finish dates in 2035.

Has anyone heard any news about the number of additional gates after T5, two satellites, and the OGT is build?

ckfred wrote:

IIRC, part of the problem with the ATS is that gauge of track for automated systems is no longer used. I don't know if gauge for new systems is wider or narrower, but I seem to recall that the City decided that trying to rebuild the existing track to a current gauge was exorbitant. So, you have a contractor working on a track gauge that is no longer used, and the City had to find a car manufacturer who could build cars for a gauge that is no longer used. (I seem to recall when the ATS was built that the car builder was a French company.)

I know enough about construction of large projects that they often don't finish on time, and that the project owner and the contractors wind up suing each other. A bridge a few miles from my house, over I-355, was closed to replace the bridge deck. By the time the project finished, 6 weeks late, the concrete was cracking. That means the bridge deck will need to be replaced next summer, after a winter with salt makes the cracks worse.

I've seen some assessments of why the ATS project spiraled out of control. Besides the gauge issue, pundits feel that the lack of professional management at the Department of Aviation contributed to the fiasco.

Is it embarrassing? Of course it is. Is this typical for Chicago? Very much so. There are a host of public works projects in the history of Chicago that were finished late, went over budget, and had problems later on. The rebuilding of the I-290/I-90 interchange near the old Post Office was supposed to finish in 2019. Now, they are pegging 2021 or 2022. There were underground problems (sewers, utilities, etc) that weren't anticipated. One building on the UIC campus developed structural issues that brought a portion of the project to a screeching halt.

This how things work in Chicago, or don't work.

What has people mad is that the City, rather than give any sort of date, even one that is ridiculously far out, now is mum on the completion date. The City ought to say that the ATS will be up and running for Thanksgiving, and then move up the date as it sees that progress was being made.

The truly frightening concern is how long the expansion of T5 will take, how long it will take to demolish and rebuild T2, and how long it will take to build out the extra concourse space in T1. If the terminal projects go as well as the ATS project, we still might be talking about finish dates in 2035.

This is a good point. They probably should’ve just torn down and rebuilt a new system from scratch. The current VAL system is outdated. Should’ve made a system like the Sky Train in ATL

BNAMealer wrote:

ckfred wrote:

IIRC, part of the problem with the ATS is that gauge of track for automated systems is no longer used. I don't know if gauge for new systems is wider or narrower, but I seem to recall that the City decided that trying to rebuild the existing track to a current gauge was exorbitant. So, you have a contractor working on a track gauge that is no longer used, and the City had to find a car manufacturer who could build cars for a gauge that is no longer used. (I seem to recall when the ATS was built that the car builder was a French company.)

I know enough about construction of large projects that they often don't finish on time, and that the project owner and the contractors wind up suing each other. A bridge a few miles from my house, over I-355, was closed to replace the bridge deck. By the time the project finished, 6 weeks late, the concrete was cracking. That means the bridge deck will need to be replaced next summer, after a winter with salt makes the cracks worse.

I've seen some assessments of why the ATS project spiraled out of control. Besides the gauge issue, pundits feel that the lack of professional management at the Department of Aviation contributed to the fiasco.

Is it embarrassing? Of course it is. Is this typical for Chicago? Very much so. There are a host of public works projects in the history of Chicago that were finished late, went over budget, and had problems later on. The rebuilding of the I-290/I-90 interchange near the old Post Office was supposed to finish in 2019. Now, they are pegging 2021 or 2022. There were underground problems (sewers, utilities, etc) that weren't anticipated. One building on the UIC campus developed structural issues that brought a portion of the project to a screeching halt.

This how things work in Chicago, or don't work.

What has people mad is that the City, rather than give any sort of date, even one that is ridiculously far out, now is mum on the completion date. The City ought to say that the ATS will be up and running for Thanksgiving, and then move up the date as it sees that progress was being made.

The truly frightening concern is how long the expansion of T5 will take, how long it will take to demolish and rebuild T2, and how long it will take to build out the extra concourse space in T1. If the terminal projects go as well as the ATS project, we still might be talking about finish dates in 2035.

This is a good point. They probably should’ve just torn down and rebuilt a new system from scratch. The current VAL system is outdated. Should’ve made a system like the Sky Train in ATL

They didn't know when it was initially built that VAL would be more or less dead within 10 years.

The new trains are Bombardier Innova APM's, the same as ATL Plane Train, DFW SkyLink, PIT People Mover, LAS People Movers, SFO AirTrain, DEN AGTS, etc. and pretty much every other similar airport transit train in the US.

ckfred wrote:

IIRC, part of the problem with the ATS is that gauge of track for automated systems is no longer used. I don't know if gauge for new systems is wider or narrower, but I seem to recall that the City decided that trying to rebuild the existing track to a current gauge was exorbitant. So, you have a contractor working on a track gauge that is no longer used, and the City had to find a car manufacturer who could build cars for a gauge that is no longer used. (I seem to recall when the ATS was built that the car builder was a French company.)

I know enough about construction of large projects that they often don't finish on time, and that the project owner and the contractors wind up suing each other. A bridge a few miles from my house, over I-355, was closed to replace the bridge deck. By the time the project finished, 6 weeks late, the concrete was cracking. That means the bridge deck will need to be replaced next summer, after a winter with salt makes the cracks worse.

I've seen some assessments of why the ATS project spiraled out of control. Besides the gauge issue, pundits feel that the lack of professional management at the Department of Aviation contributed to the fiasco.

Is it embarrassing? Of course it is. Is this typical for Chicago? Very much so. There are a host of public works projects in the history of Chicago that were finished late, went over budget, and had problems later on. The rebuilding of the I-290/I-90 interchange near the old Post Office was supposed to finish in 2019. Now, they are pegging 2021 or 2022. There were underground problems (sewers, utilities, etc) that weren't anticipated. One building on the UIC campus developed structural issues that brought a portion of the project to a screeching halt.

This how things work in Chicago, or don't work.

What has people mad is that the City, rather than give any sort of date, even one that is ridiculously far out, now is mum on the completion date. The City ought to say that the ATS will be up and running for Thanksgiving, and then move up the date as it sees that progress was being made.

The truly frightening concern is how long the expansion of T5 will take, how long it will take to demolish and rebuild T2, and how long it will take to build out the extra concourse space in T1. If the terminal projects go as well as the ATS project, we still might be talking about finish dates in 2035.

Interesting detail, thanks!

One thing I would say is that this is not an unusual thing in projects like this where you're dealing with updating an almost 30 year old system. While I agree the VAL system is somewhat rare, it's not completely obsolete. I'm pretty sure the OrlyVAL and CDGVAL both use it. And I believe there's a system in Jacksonville that ORD actually aquired a few cars from years ago... or maybe it was the other way around. It's a shame as VAL is a much more robust, capable and comfortable system than the SkyTrains but I guess it's like BETA vs. VHS.

As far as being mad at the city and being pessimistic about the upcoming projects, let's remember that the OMP runway reconfiguration projects all came in under budget and finished early. The only reason the last few parts were delayed was because of the funding hold up from the airlines. The city and contractors did an amazing job completing the individual projects early and under budget. So I wouldn't necessarily be pessimistic about the T5 and New terminal yet.

Regarding the various VAL systems: only O'Hare and Taipei (as well as the deceased install in Jacksonville, where O'Hare did buy the rolling stock) used the wider VAL 256 standard. So O'Hare has an orphan which Siemens (who now uses Matra's patents) is not pursuing, even though a successor to VAL 206/208 has been introduced as NeoVAL. I wonder what former politician or fixer sold the city this lonely disaster back in the mid '80s (bids were due in March, 1985: https://www.chicagotribune.com/news/ct-xpm-1985-03-30-8501170991-story.html)

More Paschen aerial updates. (About the only reason to check Facebook any more.)

https://www.facebook.com/FHPaschen/photos/pb.180238015346032.-2207520000../2612597112110098/?type=3&theater

sircygnus wrote:

Has anyone heard any news about the number of additional gates after T5, two satellites, and the OGT is build?

FWIW, I've never seen any plans that got down to the granular level of gates in the terminals beyond Sat 2; only diagrams with outlines of terminals , such as this example from April 2018 (from the CDA's O'Hare 21 Terminal Area Plan):

Above, Satellites 3 & 4, which sircygnus is wondering about, are labeled confusingly "2" and "3".
The the largest blue terminal in the center, along with Sat 1 (next blue terminal west, attached to current T 1, "C" gates concourse) together form the Global Terminal. Next satellite west, also in blue but unidentified here, is Sat 2, the replacement for much of the current T-2 gate activity.

Incidentally, the trigger for building for the satellite terminals 3 & 4 was always reported to be a yearly pax count of 101,500,000, although I haven't heard that repeated for awhile.

Also, there is no information that I've seen about the number of gates we can expect in the "redevelopments" of Terminal 1, B&C & Terminal 3 & Concourse G, which are in the works after the Global Terminal is built, supposedly.

chidino wrote:

More Paschen aerial updates. (About the only reason to check Facebook any more.)

https://www.facebook.com/FHPaschen/photos/pb.180238015346032.-2207520000../2612597112110098/?type=3&theater

Great progress - Gotta love their drone shots. Thanks for posting, chidino!