jetblastdubai wrote:

airstatdfw wrote:

We can depart Rwy 9C from FF or use the full length if we are also landing the Rwy.

I'm curious if ORD Plans and Procedures office has worked out traffic flows when 27L/9R is lengthened and usable.

On west flow: departing 27L while landing 27C or 27R (similar to the flow on the south complex) could result in some substantial congestion on adjacent taxiways. With the west end of 27L at taxiway Z, there will not be any place for 27C/R arrivals to cross 27L unrestricted, unless they taxi all the way back to PP...assuming departures will be from TT or another intersection. I can see the departure line stretching back to block the T1 north port very quickly. Additionally a lineup over the bridge will block block sides of the L alley pretty fast.

I would think it might be simpler to land 27L and make 27C a departure runway and feed it via KK and E.

What have you heard?

This makes sense to me, but I think the problem you’ll run into is there won’t be anywhere to run inbounds from 27R. Departing 27C would mean they would have to line up departures on twy E, and now we have the same problem where we have to hold short of other arriving runways again.

My thought is a LAHSO operation could be employed so 27C arrivals could be instructed to hold short of KK, and then have the inbounds use E and cross 27L at PP. 27R arrivals could also join E unrestricted and follow the line.

True, you still have the departure line problem for 27L, they will probably depart from G2 or G3 and line up on G. But, with departures from 22L, 28R@N5, and 27L@G2, the line shouldn’t be horrible with 3 departure runways.

jetblastdubai wrote:

airstatdfw wrote:

We can depart Rwy 9C from FF or use the full length if we are also landing the Rwy.

I'm curious if ORD Plans and Procedures office has worked out traffic flows when 27L/9R is lengthened and usable.

On west flow: departing 27L while landing 27C or 27R (similar to the flow on the south complex) could result in some substantial congestion on adjacent taxiways. With the west end of 27L at taxiway Z, there will not be any place for 27C/R arrivals to cross 27L unrestricted, unless they taxi all the way back to PP...assuming departures will be from TT or another intersection. I can see the departure line stretching back to block the T1 north port very quickly. Additionally a lineup over the bridge will block block sides of the L alley pretty fast.

I would think it might be simpler to land 27L and make 27C a departure runway and feed it via KK and E.

What have you heard?

They are going to completely rework G2 and G3 to make easier to use with 27L. Rwy 27L departures will be from G3 I believe but that is still a year away. The plan is for the 27R arrivals to cross 27C at Z then taxi back join with the 27C arrivals and cross 27R at PP. If unable to LAHSO they will cross 27C at TT. I believe A and B will switch directions like the old plan X days. Also keep in mind with the new terminals being built A and B will be completely reworked over by A10, A11 area to have them run into K and L.

airstatdfw wrote:

They are going to completely rework G2 and G3 to make easier to use with 27L. Rwy 27L departures will be from G3 I believe but that is still a year away.

Reconfiguring G2 and G3 will help a lot. At DXB, we had departure intersections set up similar to BB and CC on ORD's 10L and we were able to treat them as the same intersection for wake turbulence. ie, we could depart a heavy from BB and a non-heavy from CC with no additional wake turbulence penalty. Very handy option when trying to split fixes, adjust the flow for ESPs, EDCTs or "no numbers yet" flights.

I figured they'd reverse A and B for the operation. Do pushes off of gates M1, M2 and M3 still technically block taxiway B north of A20? If so, arrivals coming over the B bridge could back up pretty fast if they have to hold short of A21 and not stop on the bridge. Not the end of the world considering all the other restrictions at the airport.

jetblastdubai wrote:

airstatdfw wrote:

I figured they'd reverse A and B for the operation. Do pushes off of gates M1, M2 and M3 still technically block taxiway B north of A20? If so, arrivals coming over the B bridge could back up pretty fast if they have to hold short of A21 and not stop on the bridge. Not the end of the world considering all the other restrictions at the airport.

Correct, but that changes when DL and EAS moves over. Pushes off EAS and DL will be on a single taxilane tail north or south as aircraft are parked more towards the building. That area (the current M1-M3) will still be a hotspot until grounds crews know not to push beyond the movement/non movement markings on to B.

jcwr56 wrote:

jetblastdubai wrote:

airstatdfw wrote:

I figured they'd reverse A and B for the operation. Do pushes off of gates M1, M2 and M3 still technically block taxiway B north of A20? If so, arrivals coming over the B bridge could back up pretty fast if they have to hold short of A21 and not stop on the bridge. Not the end of the world considering all the other restrictions at the airport.

Correct, but that changes when DL and EAS moves over. Pushes off EAS and DL will be on a single taxilane tail north or south as aircraft are parked more towards the building. That area (the current M1-M3) will still be a hotspot until grounds crews know not to push beyond the movement/non movement markings on to B.

Where will they leave the aircraft after push? I've been out of the operation for years now but when I was working at ORD United trained us to put the aircraft on to B, back then both UA and AA were parking widebody 763s and some narrowbody aircraft at M1-M3 but the push was the same no matter the aircraft type once clearance was given the aircraft was put onto the taxiway because they wasn't a lot of space for the taxi crews to maneuver if we did not put it on the taxiway. I'm assuming ATC gave permission for the aircraft to be on the active taxiway because we never heard a single complaint. Whereas over at terminal 1 if pushing a widebody 744, 77E, 77W, A436 off C10, C16, or C18 (C16 and C18 are difficult pushes if flanked by other widebodies) if any part of that aircraft overhung onto taxiway A (its been a while I think its taxiway A) and the person just left the aircraft ATC would call United's ramp tower immediately with a few choice words they didn't like their taxiways being blocked by aircraft overhanging.

On the few rare occasions LH's ORD-MUC an A346 would use C10 most pushers just got into the habit of ask maintenance to ask the flight crew to request the adjacent taxiway be close because the push off C10 requires a turn tail north and that A346 did not like tight turns because of that center MLG. I use to believe the 744 was the hardest aircraft to push off the gate until the first time I pushed a LH A346 off C10. The 744 would tolerate a tight turn within limitations, but the A346 would fight you every step of the way.

CrankyFlier is now reporting Southwest has just quietly trimmed 1X daily roundtrip from each of the markets they intend to serve from ORD.

Is this the result of gate availability at terminal 5, lack of demand? Or could the launch of ORD flights be having a slight negative impact on MDW? Instead of siphoning passengers away from AA, or UA, Southwest is instead siphoning passengers away from their MDW operations?

"Southwest Cuts O’Hare
In an odd turn of events, Southwest has cut 1x daily frequency from each of its O’Hare markets before the service even started. There are a lot of potential theories here, but it’s most definitely not normal to see Southwest do something like this. So… speculate away. Southwest also loaded its MAX schedules with flights beginning March 11. There will be 10 aircraft routings per day criss-crossing the country."

https://crankyflier.com/2021/02/08/esca ... -goes-big/

jayunited wrote:

CrankyFlier is now reporting Southwest has just quietly trimmed 1X daily roundtrip from each of the markets they intend to serve from ORD.

Is this the result of gate availability at terminal 5, lack of demand? Or could the launch of ORD flights be having a slight negative impact on MDW? Instead of siphoning passengers away from AA, or UA, Southwest is instead siphoning passengers away from their MDW operations?

"Southwest Cuts O’Hare
In an odd turn of events, Southwest has cut 1x daily frequency from each of its O’Hare markets before the service even started. There are a lot of potential theories here, but it’s most definitely not normal to see Southwest do something like this. So… speculate away. Southwest also loaded its MAX schedules with flights beginning March 11. There will be 10 aircraft routings per day criss-crossing the country."

https://crankyflier.com/2021/02/08/esca ... -goes-big/

My theory is a little bit of gate space and lack of demand right off the bat. Honestly, I thought the original schedule was too ambitious. Considering this is mostly going to be O&D, it will take a while to establish demand. But I'm optimistic the routes will be successful eventually.

jayunited wrote:

CrankyFlier is now reporting Southwest has just quietly trimmed 1X daily roundtrip from each of the markets they intend to serve from ORD.

Is this the result of gate availability at terminal 5, lack of demand? Or could the launch of ORD flights be having a slight negative impact on MDW? Instead of siphoning passengers away from AA, or UA, Southwest is instead siphoning passengers away from their MDW operations?

"Southwest Cuts O’Hare
In an odd turn of events, Southwest has cut 1x daily frequency from each of its O’Hare markets before the service even started. There are a lot of potential theories here, but it’s most definitely not normal to see Southwest do something like this. So… speculate away. Southwest also loaded its MAX schedules with flights beginning March 11. There will be 10 aircraft routings per day criss-crossing the country."

https://crankyflier.com/2021/02/08/esca ... -goes-big/

Runway765 wrote:

My theory is a little bit of gate space and lack of demand right off the bat. Honestly, I thought the original schedule was too ambitious. Considering this is mostly going to be O&D, it will take a while to establish demand. But I'm optimistic the routes will be successful eventually.

I can understand WN reducing frequencies on ORD-DAL/DEN/BNA/PHX nonstop service with O&D demand being significantly down on CHI-DAL/DEN/BNA/PHX (not only on WN MDW-DAL/DEN/BNA/PHX but also on ORD-DFW/DEN/BNA/PHX on other airlines). WN also still has a significant amount of nonstop service to DAL, DEN, and PHX from MDW, even though WN has reduced frequencies on MDW-DAL/DEN/PHX during the COVID-19 pandemic.

While WN hasn't yet added ORD-ATL/HOU/LAS nonstop service, WN might also be wanting to add ORD-ATL/HOU/LAS nonstop service with
(a) ATL, HOU, and LAS being WN hubs,
(b) ATL, HOU, and LAS being top destinations traveled to from MDW on WN,
(c) WN recently making other adds out of ATL, HOU, and LAS, including ATL-JAN/LIT/SDF/MEM/MIA/OKC/OMA/SRQ, HOU-CVG/DTW/RSW/GSP/JAN/LGB/MIA/MSP/ONT/SNA/RNO/SRQ/SAV/PBI/TUS, and LAS-FAT/SBA,
(d) WN being able to offer connections to some destinations that WN doesn't serve nonstop from DAL or BNA through ATL, HOU, or LAS,
(e) HOU (Houston Hobby) being the largest remaining U.S. airport (by number of domestic passengers in 2019) without any nonstop service from ORD (even though IAH (Houston Intercontinental) already has nonstop service from ORD on AA, UA, and NK), and
(f) WN already having a significant FF base in Atlanta, Chicago, Houston, and Vegas to support ORD-ATL/HOU/LAS nonstop service on WN.

Runway765 wrote:

jayunited wrote:

CrankyFlier is now reporting Southwest has just quietly trimmed 1X daily roundtrip from each of the markets they intend to serve from ORD.

Is this the result of gate availability at terminal 5, lack of demand? Or could the launch of ORD flights be having a slight negative impact on MDW? Instead of siphoning passengers away from AA, or UA, Southwest is instead siphoning passengers away from their MDW operations?

"Southwest Cuts O’Hare
In an odd turn of events, Southwest has cut 1x daily frequency from each of its O’Hare markets before the service even started. There are a lot of potential theories here, but it’s most definitely not normal to see Southwest do something like this. So… speculate away. Southwest also loaded its MAX schedules with flights beginning March 11. There will be 10 aircraft routings per day criss-crossing the country."

https://crankyflier.com/2021/02/08/esca ... -goes-big/

My theory is a little bit of gate space and lack of demand right off the bat. Honestly, I thought the original schedule was too ambitious. Considering this is mostly going to be O&D, it will take a while to establish demand. But I'm optimistic the routes will be successful eventually.

It's not gate space. They dropped a few, but will add back in during the summer.

The condensed environmental Assessment for Taxiway A &B relocation and South Basin expansion has been posted (Link below) .

https://www.flychicago.com/SiteCollecti ... t%20EA.pdf

Page 7 has an illustration of the new Taxiway A& B alignment and expanded south detention basin.

Page 13 lists the estimated dates for the projects.
- Of note, the expansion of the South basin begins in the second quarter of this year. This requires the closing of HH and JJ.
- Demolition of Taxiway R, SS, and T begins in First quarter of next year, and the relocated taxiways A & B begin buildout in third quarter of next year.

jayunited wrote:

I think 2021 will be a smooth year for WN at ORD's T5 as international traffic will remain depressed because of COVID restrictions and closed borders. What concerns me is 4-5 years from now when international traffic is rebounding and Delta has move out of T2 over to T5 but the Global Terminal (that is replacing the current T2) is still under construction. In 4-5 years T5 is going to need to accommodate DL's full domestic schedule, WN's full domestic schedule, F9's full schedule, AA's international inbound schedule, UA's international inbound schedule, along with at least 29 International carriers.

I know once all the new construction and existing gate reconfiguration is completed T5 will have an additional 10 gates, the problem is DL existing operation at T2 already utilizes 6 or 7 gates. Once Delta move to T5 if their plan is to expand their operation once at T5 along with WN (it only a matter of time before they expand at ORD) those 10 additional gates will be rendered mute because you will have all these carriers jockeying for gates during primetime (10 a.m. - 8 p.m.) and very few requesting gates from 6-10 a.m. or 9-11 p.m.. How the city is going to solve this problem without a melt down everyday is going to be interesting to watch.

But if those 10 gates can accommodate delta and southwest, then the rest of the traffic is basically what T5 handles now, no? I mean, yes, it's cramped during the prime int'l arrival and departure banks, but they've managed for a while now, and even continued to add service here and there. So I think they'll be okay.

I really wish the city could have used this depressed year to speed up construction. If they had advanced work on the new T1 concourse (I forget it's official designation simultaneously with the T5 expansion, the whole project could have been a year ahead. That's gives them one additional year of breathing space to get the OGT done while the industry recovers, before they start exceeding 2019 numbers again. But I understand that right now, they're probably just focusing on keeping the airport solvent with the reduced landing fees they're getting.

muralir wrote:

jayunited wrote:

I think 2021 will be a smooth year for WN at ORD's T5 as international traffic will remain depressed because of COVID restrictions and closed borders. What concerns me is 4-5 years from now when international traffic is rebounding and Delta has move out of T2 over to T5 but the Global Terminal (that is replacing the current T2) is still under construction. In 4-5 years T5 is going to need to accommodate DL's full domestic schedule, WN's full domestic schedule, F9's full schedule, AA's international inbound schedule, UA's international inbound schedule, along with at least 29 International carriers.

I know once all the new construction and existing gate reconfiguration is completed T5 will have an additional 10 gates, the problem is DL existing operation at T2 already utilizes 6 or 7 gates. Once Delta move to T5 if their plan is to expand their operation once at T5 along with WN (it only a matter of time before they expand at ORD) those 10 additional gates will be rendered mute because you will have all these carriers jockeying for gates during primetime (10 a.m. - 8 p.m.) and very few requesting gates from 6-10 a.m. or 9-11 p.m.. How the city is going to solve this problem without a melt down everyday is going to be interesting to watch.

But if those 10 gates can accommodate delta and southwest, then the rest of the traffic is basically what T5 handles now, no? I mean, yes, it's cramped during the prime int'l arrival and departure banks, but they've managed for a while now, and even continued to add service here and there. So I think they'll be okay.

I really wish the city could have used this depressed year to speed up construction. If they had advanced work on the new T1 concourse (I forget it's official designation simultaneously with the T5 expansion, the whole project could have been a year ahead. That's gives them one additional year of breathing space to get the OGT done while the industry recovers, before they start exceeding 2019 numbers again. But I understand that right now, they're probably just focusing on keeping the airport solvent with the reduced landing fees they're getting.

Not sure when the design and engineering specifications are complete for the “T-1” expansion. The designs released to the public so far are very preliminary. In any event, O’Hare can find some space in 1 and 3 to accommodate overcrowding at T5 if necessary. It will be awhile until United and American are up to full capacity at O’Hare.

muralir wrote:

But if those 10 gates can accommodate delta and southwest, then the rest of the traffic is basically what T5 handles now, no? I mean, yes, it's cramped during the prime int'l arrival and departure banks, but they've managed for a while now, and even continued to add service here and there. So I think they'll be okay.

I really wish the city could have used this depressed year to speed up construction. If they had advanced work on the new T1 concourse (I forget it's official designation simultaneously with the T5 expansion, the whole project could have been a year ahead. That's gives them one additional year of breathing space to get the OGT done while the industry recovers, before they start exceeding 2019 numbers again. But I understand that right now, they're probably just focusing on keeping the airport solvent with the reduced landing fees they're getting.

The information I'm going off off is several years old so please forgive me if it is outdated.

I though work on the satellite terminal that is eventually supposed to connect to the existing C concourse is supposed to begin later this year in 2021. If construction doesn't fall behind the satellite terminal should be complete I think by early 2024.

I believe United (mainline/express) has to vacate the E concourse at the same time Delta moves to terminal 5 so demolition can begin on the E concourse. Meanwhile the much larger United Express operation on the F concourse has to be completely relocated by late 2023 if I'm not mistaken. Hopefully the satellite terminal's construction will be on track to open in early 2024. If not, things are going to get real tight for United at terminal 1 because United will temporarily loose some gates on the low C's do to construction. Until the satellite terminal is opened and with the closure of the F concourse, United will temporarily only have the B and C concourse minus 2 or 3 gates on the low C's and by 2024 that could be problematic for United in terms of gate space.

Looking at the timetable as horrible as the pandemic continues to be it has presented ORD with a window of opportunity. If ORD were operating at full capacity this would truly be a nightmare type scenario. However with traffic down to historic lows perhaps this project will start on-time and wrap up on -time.

jayunited wrote:

Looking at the timetable as horrible as the pandemic continues to be it has presented ORD with a window of opportunity. If ORD were operating at full capacity this would truly be a nightmare type scenario. However with traffic down to historic lows perhaps this project will start on-time and wrap up on -time.

But can they pay for it? Traffic is down so less revenue is coming into the coffers, thus, potentially making it unaffordable.

Practicality folks - has the City of Chicago ever done ANYTHING on time and on budget? With the infighting between the Chicago Schools and the Mayor, I truly believe ORD construction is far down the list. Not sure if the Mayor is even aware of the ORD construction projects, deadlines, and budgetary issues right now.

kd9gy wrote:

Practicality folks - has the City of Chicago ever done ANYTHING on time and on budget? With the infighting between the Chicago Schools and the Mayor, I truly believe ORD construction is far down the list. Not sure if the Mayor is even aware of the ORD construction projects, deadlines, and budgetary issues right now.

Midway Modernization Program - on time and on budget.

https://www.mdwmod.com/SiteCollectionDo ... t_2020.pdf

ORDfan wrote:

kd9gy wrote:

Practicality folks - has the City of Chicago ever done ANYTHING on time and on budget? With the infighting between the Chicago Schools and the Mayor, I truly believe ORD construction is far down the list. Not sure if the Mayor is even aware of the ORD construction projects, deadlines, and budgetary issues right now.

Midway Modernization Program - on time and on budget.

https://www.mdwmod.com/SiteCollectionDo ... t_2020.pdf

Also hasn’t the OMP (talking runways/taxiways only) largely been on schedule and at or below budget? This whole endeavour started some 15 years ago and has largely been a success I thought. The people mover and rental car facility was not part of the original OMP.

Rl12383 wrote:

The condensed environmental Assessment for Taxiway A &B relocation and South Basin expansion has been posted (Link below) .

https://www.flychicago.com/SiteCollecti ... t%20EA.pdf

Page 7 has an illustration of the new Taxiway A& B alignment and expanded south detention basin.

Page 13 lists the estimated dates for the projects.
- Of note, the expansion of the South basin begins in the second quarter of this year. This requires the closing of HH and JJ.
- Demolition of Taxiway R, SS, and T begins in First quarter of next year, and the relocated taxiways A & B begin buildout in third quarter of next year.

Why are they rehabbing the Northwestern sector of the terminal ring taxiways if the T1 Expansion will require realignment of those taxiways in a few years? Are they that bad? I understand rehabbing from ~Concourse G on down since those will remain, but I don't understand rehabbing those taxiways around T1.

ORDfan wrote:

kd9gy wrote:

Practicality folks - has the City of Chicago ever done ANYTHING on time and on budget? With the infighting between the Chicago Schools and the Mayor, I truly believe ORD construction is far down the list. Not sure if the Mayor is even aware of the ORD construction projects, deadlines, and budgetary issues right now.

Midway Modernization Program - on time and on budget.

https://www.mdwmod.com/SiteCollectionDo ... t_2020.pdf

Was the Northeast Cargo facility completed early? I have no idea about on budget but I thought it opened early.

jayunited wrote:

muralir wrote:

But if those 10 gates can accommodate delta and southwest, then the rest of the traffic is basically what T5 handles now, no? I mean, yes, it's cramped during the prime int'l arrival and departure banks, but they've managed for a while now, and even continued to add service here and there. So I think they'll be okay.

I really wish the city could have used this depressed year to speed up construction. If they had advanced work on the new T1 concourse (I forget it's official designation simultaneously with the T5 expansion, the whole project could have been a year ahead. That's gives them one additional year of breathing space to get the OGT done while the industry recovers, before they start exceeding 2019 numbers again. But I understand that right now, they're probably just focusing on keeping the airport solvent with the reduced landing fees they're getting.

The information I'm going off off is several years old so please forgive me if it is outdated.

I though work on the satellite terminal that is eventually supposed to connect to the existing C concourse is supposed to begin later this year in 2021. If construction doesn't fall behind the satellite terminal should be complete I think by early 2024.

I believe United (mainline/express) has to vacate the E concourse at the same time Delta moves to terminal 5 so demolition can begin on the E concourse. Meanwhile the much larger United Express operation on the F concourse has to be completely relocated by late 2023 if I'm not mistaken. Hopefully the satellite terminal's construction will be on track to open in early 2024. If not, things are going to get real tight for United at terminal 1 because United will temporarily loose some gates on the low C's do to construction. Until the satellite terminal is opened and with the closure of the F concourse, United will temporarily only have the B and C concourse minus 2 or 3 gates on the low C's and by 2024 that could be problematic for United in terms of gate space.

Looking at the timetable as horrible as the pandemic continues to be it has presented ORD with a window of opportunity. If ORD were operating at full capacity this would truly be a nightmare type scenario. However with traffic down to historic lows perhaps this project will start on-time and wrap up on -time.

Air Canada will also have to relocate out of E. I know the original plan was for them to move into T1 (United has a plethora of extra counter space in T1 now that the majority of O&D traffic now uses the self-print kiosks and bag drops near the center of landside concourse). However, if there's not two available gates in T1 that might be problematic. They would either have to shunted into F or temporarily move the whole operation to T3 (likely L gates) or T5.

On their first day of ORD ops, Southwest has used M2, M3, M4, and M5 so far. Many of the same gates Frontier uses.

It's so strange to me to see the WN colors at ORD. Saw one of their birds on short final yesterday and I had to remind myself - it hasn't sunk in yet.

Some good photos of the inaugural day here. Seemed pretty low-key as far as ceremonies go... sign of the times I guess.

https://simpleflying.com/southwest-chic ... inaugural/

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

Air taxi service from downtown Chicago to O’Hare could launch by summer. I doubt t will work. Its not leaving from the heart of the loop.

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

I didn't see anything on the A350 flights several times a week for both SAS and Finnair on here. Also a Silk Way Il76 was at ORD on Sunday.

Finnair, I saw, was once or twice here, SAS is every day. ZP5221 arrived late for about 3 hours but departed 4 hrs late than scheduled around 8pm. Also Magma (Air Atlanta) flying to ORD more often.

Magma mainly goes to RFD weekly. Finnair had built a flight AY8879 HEL-ORD and has already flown it several times.

Looks like Finnair is using AY8877 on some days for the A350 flights. They seem to be almost daily now. AY8877 is on it's way to ORD right now.

Also the Kalitta Air 703CK now painted in Pacific Air Cargo colors was at the ORD Northeast cargo today.

scaledesigns wrote:

Also the Kalitta Air 703CK now painted in Pacific Air Cargo colors was at the ORD Northeast cargo today.

I saw it few days ago as well.

More good news on the cargo front https://ajot.com/news/cma-cgm-air-cargo ... to-chicago
Hopefully it’ll be a daytime flight for us photographers!

sircygnus wrote:

The bid opening for the busing contract has been pushed back again. Now until April 15th (from March 8th). Not sure what the term of this contract is for, but taken altogether it looks like the ATS is still a ways off and the buses will be around for a while longer.

I flew out of ORD last week and parked my car at the new Multi-Modal Facility. Before driving down there I figured surely by now the people mover must be back up and running, so as you can probably guess I was pretty bewildered when I went online and saw that it was STILL out of service. How can it possibly take this long just to test the train cars? IIRC they were doing it all the way back in May when I was there. On a related note, are there plans to re-open the E parking lot once travel picks up again and will the ATS still stop there? I noticed its been shuttered for a while.

Planeboy17 wrote:

More good news on the cargo front https://ajot.com/news/cma-cgm-air-cargo ... to-chicago
Hopefully it’ll be a daytime flight for us photographers!

Days 23467. To start with a 340 then swap to a 330. 1300-1530 Local time starting on the 9th. Will be located at NE Cargo.

Delta used to have a large passenger base in the 1960s, 1970s, and 1980s, when it flew out of ORD to a number of southern cities. My father flew DL regularly to BNA, SDF, and ATL. He would fly Delta to Florida and St. Louis. I think DL used to fly ORD-IAH.

One of the reasons why DL built Concourse L was that it was too constrained for gate space on G, especially with the number of widebodies that DL operated. In the 1990s, most of the ORD-ATL flights were L-1011s and 767s.

But, the question becomes how much business can DL generate at ORD or take away from AA and UA. The problem is that DL won't have any RJ traffic connecting smaller cities in the Upper Midwest. It will have to rely solely on O&D Chicago traffic.

As for the notion of AA dehubbing ORD, I think AA has too many contracts with businesses who need to move employees in and out of Chicago and the Upper Midwest. Further, with no hub in the Upper Midwest, AA is at a disadvantage with UA (also ORD) and DL (MSP and DTW).

jcwr56 wrote:

Planeboy17 wrote:

More good news on the cargo front https://ajot.com/news/cma-cgm-air-cargo ... to-chicago
Hopefully it’ll be a daytime flight for us photographers!

Days 23467. To start with a 340 then swap to a 330. 1300-1530 Local time starting on the 9th. Will be located at NE Cargo.

Thanks for the info jcwr56.
Just curious, do you know if El Al is still planning to start next month? If your not at liberty to say I completely understand.

Planeboy17 wrote:

jcwr56 wrote:

Planeboy17 wrote:

More good news on the cargo front https://ajot.com/news/cma-cgm-air-cargo ... to-chicago
Hopefully it’ll be a daytime flight for us photographers!

Days 23467. To start with a 340 then swap to a 330. 1300-1530 Local time starting on the 9th. Will be located at NE Cargo.

Thanks for the info jcwr56.
Just curious, do you know if El Al is still planning to start next month? If your not at liberty to say I completely understand.

Not next month, if anything June.

I haven't noticed it mentioned on here, but AC will be running both 77W and 789 from YVR as freighters during March and April. They be located at T5.

Wow, thanks for the info! That’s great news.

Well, the March schedule has been pretty good for American out of ORD. Seeing more CRJ-700s replacing E145s on various routes (ROC, ALB, IND, BHM, GRB, etc.). Also, mainline has returned (in the form of the 738) to routes like BNA, SLC, and others.

Do any pictures exist of the old temporary terminal 4 that's now the bus center? I'm heading to BNA this weekend and am going in for a covid test in the morning and started thinking about it because that's where they have the testing set up. What was it like flying in and out of there? How did the FIS work? Did they just load the buses out on the front curb or was there a different area? It's just something that I've wondered about

jcwr56 wrote:

[
Not next month, if anything June.

I haven't noticed it mentioned on here, but AC will be running both 77W and 789 from YVR as freighters during March and April. They be located at T5.

Do you know if UA ramp will still handle ground handling for these cargo only flights? If so is there a chance AC's freighters would have to go to the North Ramp instead of T5? United parks most of our international cargo only arrivals on the North Ramp and a United van picks up the pilots airside transports the pilots over to T5 to clear customs and then picks them up to take them to their car.

Hi Jay, The cargo flights go to the Cargo building if gates aren’t available. The north ramp isn’t used for that. I haven’t heard if we will be working Air Canada.

jcwr56 wrote:

Planeboy17 wrote:

More good news on the cargo front https://ajot.com/news/cma-cgm-air-cargo ... to-chicago
Hopefully it’ll be a daytime flight for us photographers!

Days 23467. To start with a 340 then swap to a 330. 1300-1530 Local time starting on the 9th. Will be located at NE Cargo.

Thanks for info. This will be not a first time when Air Belgium will be flying to ORD. Previously, like 2 years ago, when LO has a fleet shortage (when they were doing engine work on their 787's), they used to fly to ORD and JFK on Air Belgium's A340's.

TUIFly 787-9 coming in Monday departing Tuesday. I’m hearing either T5 or NE cargo as a freighter operation.

Thanks for all the heads up info jcwr56! Any idea on times?

Qatar start sending B77L instead of B77W as QR723 last Thursday. Tomorrow's ETA 7:20am.

maps4ltd wrote:

Well, the March schedule has been pretty good for American out of ORD. Seeing more CRJ-700s replacing E145s on various routes (ROC, ALB, IND, BHM, GRB, etc.). Also, mainline has returned (in the form of the 738) to routes like BNA, SLC, and others.

UAX also began first-ever service ORD to VPS and ECP on Thursday and the loads have been really good so far. I know it's just 1x CR2 daily on a leisure flight but pretty good news! Maybe they'll stick around.

UA upgraded one of the ORD-JAX flights to mainline most days of the week.

They have added an ORD-BNA mainline as a counter to WN and kept mainline in DFW and BWI.

Oddly ORD-ATL has gone all UAX, yields must suck because the loads have been good.

ORD-DTW gets one mainline turn per week Sunday night-Monday morning.

UA has been operating up to two of the ORD-MCO flights with B763 Polaris non-Premium. I know these seat only a few more than the B753 but it's neat to have a widebody back on a UA non-hub-to-hub flight within the lower 48.

jcwr56 wrote:

TUIFly 787-9 coming in Monday departing Tuesday. I’m hearing either T5 or NE cargo as a freighter operation.

Saw this bird today, looks like it land at 2:20pm. Strangely the flight (X39440) doesn't appear on flight radar.

Hope someone caught a pic! Is this the first time TUI has ever landed at ORD?

CDA finally released December pax totals, which of course include final YTD figures.

It's not pretty. But hopefully should only get better from here on out.

https://www.flychicago.com/SiteCollecti ... UMMARY.pdf

https://www.flychicago.com/SiteCollecti ... UMMARY.pdf

Does anyone know if any of the planned airlines or other LCC/ULCC like Breeze, Avelo, Eastern, or Allegiant have looked into ORD/Chicago service? (I think Allegiant is at MDW, are they looking to grow there and/or also open down the road at ORD?)

kyrone wrote:

Does anyone know if any of the planned airlines or other LCC/ULCC like Breeze, Avelo, Eastern, or Allegiant have looked into ORD/Chicago service? (I think Allegiant is at MDW, are they looking to grow there and/or also open down the road at ORD?)

I don't think we'll ever see G4 at ORD. G4's strategy is when serving a large metro area with more than one airport, they serve the smaller airport. For example, Tampa Bay - PIE; Fort Myers - PGD; Orlando - Sanford; Chicago - MDW, Rockford

Smaller, alternative airports are cheaper operating costs and the airline has far more leverage