Kind of surprised no one has posted this yet but AA and UA have announced some summer INTL flying the last couple of days.
AA will resume ATH in June
DUB July 2
FCO and CDG August 17
LHR will continue at once daily thru the summer.

UA just announced ORD-KEF

Planeboy17 wrote:

Kind of surprised no one has posted this yet but AA and UA have announced some summer INTL flying the last couple of days.
AA will resume ATH in June
DUB July 2
FCO and CDG August 17
LHR will continue at once daily thru the summer.

UA just announced ORD-KEF

International travel is a lost cause for this summer. With the decisions that are coming out of thestate department, we'll be lucky to see it back by Christmas. The airlines have wild aspirations for some of these routes and not just those from ORD. My guess is most of these routes get postponed to next year

piedmontf284000 wrote:

Planeboy17 wrote:

Kind of surprised no one has posted this yet but AA and UA have announced some summer INTL flying the last couple of days.
AA will resume ATH in June
DUB July 2
FCO and CDG August 17
LHR will continue at once daily thru the summer.

UA just announced ORD-KEF

International travel is a lost cause for this summer. With the decisions that are coming out of thestate department, we'll be lucky to see it back by Christmas. The airlines have wild aspirations for some of these routes and not just those from ORD. My guess is most of these routes get postponed to next year

Very interesting that you say that. AA flying to ATH I hear is oversold on many days and Greece already said they will allow vaccinated tourists to visit. Iceland also said if you are vaccinated you can visit their country. Delta and United have now both added service to KEF, I wonder if American will follow. Iceland air will also return to ORD in Jun as well. Many International airlines will be retuning to pax services starting in Jun. Both the UK and France have discussed about allowing Americans to visit, starting in late May.

Not sounding very good....

https://www.iatanews.com/2021/04/20/us- ... countries/

Just saw on ORD's Instagram page that it looks as though 9R/27L is closed for construction. I suppose I could check the NOTAM but can anyone confirm this? 9C/27C primarily used for departures as a result?

sircygnus wrote:

Just saw on ORD's Instagram page that it looks as though 9R/27L is closed for construction. I suppose I could check the NOTAM but can anyone confirm this? 9C/27C primarily used for departures as a result?

That is correct, but 27C is primarily an arrival runway.

In east flow they’ve been using 9C for departures.

I saw a Cargolux 747 land on 9C yesterday afternoon also..

AirlineBob wrote:

The last several times I've flown into ORD, I noticed two aircraft parked nose to nose near the AA hangars. One looks like an all-white 727, and the other is in AA livery (not sure of the type, a bit bigger than the 727, maybe an A320)?

Anyone know what I'm referring to? Any idea why those aircraft are there? I've seen them over at least the last six months, maybe longer.

B722 is a former FX plane that was donated by FedEx years ago after removed from service. Her name is Felicia. She used to be a ARFF training a/c.
Other plane is former AA B763 that caught fire during take off roll to MIA (AA383 , N345AN) in 2016 and was moved to the ARFF trainig area as per FAA order. There are words that investigation is still in place so part of the plane is still wrapped in plastic and when we were there to look closer, we were asked to not post a pictures of burned plane anywhere in social media.

sircygnus wrote:

Just saw on ORD's Instagram page that it looks as though 9R/27L is closed for construction. I suppose I could check the NOTAM but can anyone confirm this? 9C/27C primarily used for departures as a result?

Per NOTAM the runway is closed until December 2nd.

Korean Air 747-8 is on the schedule for Summer 2021

Planeboy17 wrote:

sircygnus wrote:

Just saw on ORD's Instagram page that it looks as though 9R/27L is closed for construction. I suppose I could check the NOTAM but can anyone confirm this? 9C/27C primarily used for departures as a result?

Per NOTAM the runway is closed until December 2nd.

Is the whole completed runway expected to be finished on Dec 2nd?

kordcj wrote:

Planeboy17 wrote:

sircygnus wrote:

Just saw on ORD's Instagram page that it looks as though 9R/27L is closed for construction. I suppose I could check the NOTAM but can anyone confirm this? 9C/27C primarily used for departures as a result?

Per NOTAM the runway is closed until December 2nd.

Is the whole completed runway expected to be finished on Dec 2nd?

I believe so. They have incentives to complete the runway rebuild/extension sooner, and penalties if the work is done after the contract date.

kordcj wrote:

Planeboy17 wrote:

sircygnus wrote:

Just saw on ORD's Instagram page that it looks as though 9R/27L is closed for construction. I suppose I could check the NOTAM but can anyone confirm this? 9C/27C primarily used for departures as a result?

Per NOTAM the runway is closed until December 2nd.

Is the whole completed runway expected to be finished on Dec 2nd?

9C is primarily used for Departures and 27C is primarily used for arrivals.

Rwy 9R/27L should be completed by Dec 2 including the taxi redesign on the East side for 27L departures.

Seems ORD is overwhelmed with the incoming cargo volume, although it is not a new problem it seems exacerbated recently with all the extra charter cargo flights.

https://www.freightwaves.com/news/fed-u ... re-airport

asuflyer wrote:

Seems ORD is overwhelmed with the incoming cargo volume, although it is not a new problem it seems exacerbated recently with all the extra charter cargo flights.

https://www.freightwaves.com/news/fed-u ... re-airport

Not exactly true, it comes down to scheduling by the tenants at NE Cargo,South, Southeast cargo. Fed Ex, UA and UPS seem to handle their own flights without issues described. It's the 3rd party handlers that want the business, bid on the business then can't handle the business they agree too.

Granted hiring staff has been challenging, but whose fault is that with the Feds giving away free cash.

jcwr56 wrote:

asuflyer wrote:

Seems ORD is overwhelmed with the incoming cargo volume, although it is not a new problem it seems exacerbated recently with all the extra charter cargo flights.

https://www.freightwaves.com/news/fed-u ... re-airport

Not exactly true, it comes down to scheduling by the tenants at NE Cargo,South, Southeast cargo. Fed Ex, UA and UPS seem to handle their own flights without issues described. It's the 3rd party handlers that want the business, bid on the business then can't handle the business they agree too.

Granted hiring staff has been challenging, but whose fault is that with the Feds giving away free cash.

Although is it the government giving away free cash opposed to low pay by these third party operators. This is how salaries should be increased, if they can’t get enough workers for more work due to pay issues they should increase their salaries correct?

Planeboy17 wrote:

jcwr56 wrote:

asuflyer wrote:

Seems ORD is overwhelmed with the incoming cargo volume, although it is not a new problem it seems exacerbated recently with all the extra charter cargo flights.

https://www.freightwaves.com/news/fed-u ... re-airport

Not exactly true, it comes down to scheduling by the tenants at NE Cargo,South, Southeast cargo. Fed Ex, UA and UPS seem to handle their own flights without issues described. It's the 3rd party handlers that want the business, bid on the business then can't handle the business they agree too.

Granted hiring staff has been challenging, but whose fault is that with the Feds giving away free cash.

Although is it the government giving away free cash opposed to low pay by these third party operators. This is how salaries should be increased, if they can’t get enough workers for more work due to pay issues they should increase their salaries correct?

Ultimately this is what has to happen to hire folks on, but the question is how much before it's not viable for all parties.

Several companies are hiring $3-4 above the minimum (the minimum was easy to hire at pre COVID) or giving out sign on bonuses and are still struggling to onboard new hires. The most common reason I hear for people not taking jobs is that they are making more sitting at home, so why get a job until they have too? Do I think that wages need to increase? Yes absolutely. But as jcwr56 mentioned, at what point is it no longer viable? Third party handlers have to pass that cost on to the airline, at what point do the airlines say this is too much? These are definitely interesting times.

piedmontf284000 wrote:

Planeboy17 wrote:

Kind of surprised no one has posted this yet but AA and UA have announced some summer INTL flying the last couple of days.
AA will resume ATH in June
DUB July 2
FCO and CDG August 17
LHR will continue at once daily thru the summer.

UA just announced ORD-KEF

International travel is a lost cause for this summer. With the decisions that are coming out of the state department, we'll be lucky to see it back by Christmas. The airlines have wild aspirations for some of these routes and not just those from ORD. My guess is most of these routes get postponed to next year

The gating factor is quarantine after arrival. Given how well the US is doing with vaccines, that won't be so much a concern for other countries. Testing will likely continue to be a requirement. Greece and Iceland have already announced they are open to US visitors. France has stated they have plans to allow US visitors starting in June. England should be dropping their quarantine requirement for US visitors by June. The only country that is questionable in my mind is Italy, given their current state.

Leisure travel will pick up fast. The question will be how many J seats the airlines can sell to those travelers, given that business travel is going lag behind.

I suppose it will end up being somewhere between both piedmontf284000's and glbltrvlr's estimates. Asia, Latin America, Africa and Europe will be slower to open than the airlines hope, especially with foot dragging by the State Department.

I tried doing a search, couldn’t find anything. What’s going on with gates B5 and B6 at ORD? They were completely fenced off and a lot of scaffolding on the terminal, and it seems like it’s been like that for awhile. With flights picking up I would think UA needs as many gates as they can especially in the center of the concourse. It was great to see very busy concourses the other day when I flew in from RSW!!

ChicagoOhare wrote:

I tried doing a search, couldn’t find anything. What’s going on with gates B5 and B6 at ORD? They were completely fenced off and a lot of scaffolding on the terminal, and it seems like it’s been like that for awhile. With flights picking up I would think UA needs as many gates as they can especially in the center of the concourse. It was great to see very busy concourses the other day when I flew in from RSW!!

Is it near the WN gates because I’m sure they want more gates ?

Wneast wrote:

ChicagoOhare wrote:

I tried doing a search, couldn’t find anything. What’s going on with gates B5 and B6 at ORD? They were completely fenced off and a lot of scaffolding on the terminal, and it seems like it’s been like that for awhile. With flights picking up I would think UA needs as many gates as they can especially in the center of the concourse. It was great to see very busy concourses the other day when I flew in from RSW!!

Is it near the WN gates because I’m sure they want more gates ?

No, WN flies out of international terminal 5 (M gates)

ChicagoOhare wrote:

I tried doing a search, couldn’t find anything. What’s going on with gates B5 and B6 at ORD? They were completely fenced off and a lot of scaffolding on the terminal, and it seems like it’s been like that for awhile. With flights picking up I would think UA needs as many gates as they can especially in the center of the concourse. It was great to see very busy concourses the other day when I flew in from RSW!!

They are replacing all the glass. The C concourse is already done and now B is being worked on. There are usually 2 gates closed at a time as work progresses. When B5 reopens then B7 will close. As better weather is here work should progress nicely. It is usually only a strain on gates when weather occurs or flights get in real early..,

TrafficCop wrote:

ChicagoOhare wrote:

I tried doing a search, couldn’t find anything. What’s going on with gates B5 and B6 at ORD? They were completely fenced off and a lot of scaffolding on the terminal, and it seems like it’s been like that for awhile. With flights picking up I would think UA needs as many gates as they can especially in the center of the concourse. It was great to see very busy concourses the other day when I flew in from RSW!!

They are replacing all the glass. The C concourse is already done and now B is being worked on. There are usually 2 gates closed at a time as work progresses. When B5 reopens then B7 will close. As better weather is here work should progress nicely. It is usually only a strain on gates when weather occurs or flights get in real early..,

Is that mostly the original glass from the late 80s getting replaced? I’ve never heard of them replacing the glass before? Hopefully this stops the leaks and buckets being scattered throughout the concourse on rainy days.

According to crankflier Eastern Airlines has now canceled their planned Chicago/ORD - Sarajevo/SJJ.

"Eastern was going to fly Chicago/O’Hare to Sarajevo this summer, but it has now canceled that plan."
https://crankyflier.com/2021/05/10/airl ... stability/

Anyone know what the pole barn looking building is for at M5-M6? It looks like it might just be a temporary structure during construction.

I saw they doing some building, terminal-like looking building with its own tower so seems like permanent. Anyone more info?

dopplerd wrote:

Anyone know what the pole barn looking building is for at M5-M6? It looks like it might just be a temporary structure during construction.

Temp bag room for T5 while the main one inside is being replaced. Should be dismantled around 2023.

gabik001 wrote:

I saw they doing some building, terminal-like looking building with its own tower so seems like permanent. Anyone more info?

You mean the expansion of T5?

It’s Terminal 5 looks like it is progressing nicely, I was surprised how tall the tower is, but I guess to look around the corner it had to be that tall.

jcwr56 wrote:

gabik001 wrote:

I saw they doing some building, terminal-like looking building with its own tower so seems like permanent. Anyone more info?

You mean the expansion of T5?

Yes, but I am surprised that it will be that big! In this case they have to pop up another tower to cover a view of the area behind a corner. And they doing it pretty quick...

asuflyer wrote:

Seems ORD is overwhelmed with the incoming cargo volume, although it is not a new problem it seems exacerbated recently with all the extra charter cargo flights.

https://www.freightwaves.com/news/fed-u ... re-airport

Is this an issue mainly of space or some other operational inefficiency? In the past ~5 years, ORD has added quite a bit of cargo space within the airport grounds. But it seems that bottlenecks still aren't resolved. Or is it just because cargo has grown so much at ORD? Which I guess is a good problem to have, and probably means they need to plan the next cargo expansion soon

FWIW, I don't think some business going to RFD is detrimental. First of all, Lord knows that areas outside of Chicago need economic development pretty badly. But even more so, I see this as complementary: it provides the basis to develop the NW Chicago corridor into a premier air logistics hub, just like the Joliet area has become such a huge train and surface transportation logistics hub. If volumes grow at RFD, ultimately, the two airports will start specializing in different types of cargo. Perhaps intermodal goods going to/from RFD to Joliet bypassing Chicago train congestion, and ORD for domestic <-> international air-to-air cargo. Or maybe RFD for general freight, and ORD for specialized stuff like cold storage and freeports. I'm just speculating, but my point is that competition isn't always better than cooperation What other logistics center can boast 2 different airports with large cargo operations, catering to different preferences and markets, but all integrated into one regional center? That could be a win-win.

I heard rumor of major damage to an EK 777 at ORD. Any word on what happened?

I am surprised the passing of Helmut Jahn didn’t get more attention on this forum.

His design for United’s Terminal 1 at ORD was (and still is) a monumental piece of architecture. The completion of T1 was a major turning point in the design of airports, not only in this country but around the world. I remember Jahn explaining his inspiration for T1 being the grand light filled spaces of Europe’s train stations. The feeling he achieved at T1 still seems to be the goal in airport designs being built all over the globe. Compare that to the low ceiling utilitarian designs of the late 60s, 70s and early 80s.

Traveling through T1 never gets old for me. When I arrive there from home, my mood changes as soon as I set foot inside. No matter how busy and crowded it can be, the space calms me and lifts me up. Arriving back at T1, I always feel I am home upon leaving the jetway. T1 is a big part of the reason I am obsessed with UA.

Also note that Jahn’s firm was a descendant of C.F. Murphy which was the original architect for T2-T3 among other buildings at ORD. C.F. Murphy became Murphy/Jahn when Helmut took over... eventually becoming just Jahn.

R.I.P. Mr. Jahn and my best to your wife, son and grandchildren. Your legacy will live on for a long time.

dopplerd wrote:

I heard rumor of major damage to an EK 777 at ORD. Any word on what happened?

Rumor on FB is that a cargo 747 (possibly Yangtze/Suparna) jetblasted empty PMCs into the tail. Some pictures I saw showed some pretty big gashes below/aft door 5L and on the bottom part of where the horizontal stabilizer meets the fuselage.

Anthstr wrote:

dopplerd wrote:

I heard rumor of major damage to an EK 777 at ORD. Any word on what happened?

Rumor on FB is that a cargo 747 (possibly Yangtze/Suparna) jetblasted empty PMCs into the tail. Some pictures I saw showed some pretty big gashes below/aft door 5L and on the bottom part of where the horizontal stabilizer meets the fuselage.

YIKES!!!! Not good..... hope someone has their insurance up to date. They really went airborne if they hit the tail!!

LH9940 is scheduled to arrive today to ORD from BOS as a leg of flight MUC-TUS (MUC-KEF-YYR-BOS-ORD-TUS). It is a CRJ-900 D-ACKL (LH Cityline) scheduled @ 9:15a. Departure to TUS is set for 10:25am. Possibly no titles on her since she was put to storage on January.

gabik001 wrote:

LH9940 is scheduled to arrive today to ORD from BOS as a leg of flight MUC-TUS (MUC-KEF-YYR-BOS-ORD-TUS). It is a CRJ-900 D-ACKL (LH Cityline) scheduled @ 9:15a. Departure to TUS is set for 10:25am. Possibly no titles on her since she was put to storage on January.

Why waste the money with landing fees and possible delays at larger airports when ferrying? Why not clear customs at Bangor and stop for fuel in CMI or SPI? Is there a logistics reason?

United787 wrote:

I am surprised the passing of Helmut Jahn didn’t get more attention on this forum.

His design for United’s Terminal 1 at ORD was (and still is) a monumental piece of architecture. The completion of T1 was a major turning point in the design of airports, not only in this country but around the world. I remember Jahn explaining his inspiration for T1 being the grand light filled spaces of Europe’s train stations. The feeling he achieved at T1 still seems to be the goal in airport designs being built all over the globe. Compare that to the low ceiling utilitarian designs of the late 60s, 70s and early 80s.

Traveling through T1 never gets old for me. When I arrive there from home, my mood changes as soon as I set foot inside. No matter how busy and crowded it can be, the space calms me and lifts me up.

If CDA had left it as Helmut designed it, I would agree with you. I just get annoyed and depressed when I walk though it now. They should rip out all the popup stores and booths that encroach on the walkways and make it impossible to pass. Gate overflows into the walkway is almost as bad and the amount of space TSA has taken is crazy. CDA has destroyed what was a beautiful facility.

glbltrvlr wrote:

United787 wrote:

I am surprised the passing of Helmut Jahn didn’t get more attention on this forum.

His design for United’s Terminal 1 at ORD was (and still is) a monumental piece of architecture. The completion of T1 was a major turning point in the design of airports, not only in this country but around the world. I remember Jahn explaining his inspiration for T1 being the grand light filled spaces of Europe’s train stations. The feeling he achieved at T1 still seems to be the goal in airport designs being built all over the globe. Compare that to the low ceiling utilitarian designs of the late 60s, 70s and early 80s.

Traveling through T1 never gets old for me. When I arrive there from home, my mood changes as soon as I set foot inside. No matter how busy and crowded it can be, the space calms me and lifts me up.

If CDA had left it as Helmut designed it, I would agree with you. I just get annoyed and depressed when I walk though it now. They should rip out all the popup stores and booths that encroach on the walkways and make it impossible to pass. Gate overflows into the walkway is almost as bad and the amount of space TSA has taken is crazy. CDA has destroyed what was a beautiful facility.

ORD T1 was designed for an era when airports functioned differently. Certainly it was breathtaking when it first opened, but that was before TSA screenings and airlines minimizing onboard food service. So airports needed to make room for food vendors. Ultimately the design of T1 has proven itself to be form over function as it seems not very versatile to accommodate changing needs and increasing passenger numbers. As part of the ORD 21 program, both T1 and T3 are supposed to get overhauls. Those plans have not been released, and they may still be in preliminary stages. It appears that all check-ins will be handled at the new global terminal replacing T2, thereby freeing up space in T1 and 3. I have no info on what will happen to these areas, but I do suspect that more of the original T1 design is vulnerable. Other major HJ projects in.Chicago are also vulnerable now too, such as the State of Illinois Building. As for ORD, the T1 design is no longer conducive to how the airport will be transformed. There will be more changes to it. That’s about all we really know for now.

AAplat4life wrote:

glbltrvlr wrote:

United787 wrote:

I am surprised the passing of Helmut Jahn didn’t get more attention on this forum.

His design for United’s Terminal 1 at ORD was (and still is) a monumental piece of architecture. The completion of T1 was a major turning point in the design of airports, not only in this country but around the world. I remember Jahn explaining his inspiration for T1 being the grand light filled spaces of Europe’s train stations. The feeling he achieved at T1 still seems to be the goal in airport designs being built all over the globe. Compare that to the low ceiling utilitarian designs of the late 60s, 70s and early 80s.

Traveling through T1 never gets old for me. When I arrive there from home, my mood changes as soon as I set foot inside. No matter how busy and crowded it can be, the space calms me and lifts me up.

If CDA had left it as Helmut designed it, I would agree with you. I just get annoyed and depressed when I walk though it now. They should rip out all the popup stores and booths that encroach on the walkways and make it impossible to pass. Gate overflows into the walkway is almost as bad and the amount of space TSA has taken is crazy. CDA has destroyed what was a beautiful facility.

ORD T1 was designed for an era when airports functioned differently. Certainly it was breathtaking when it first opened, but that was before TSA screenings and airlines minimizing onboard food service. So airports needed to make room for food vendors. Ultimately the design of T1 has proven itself to be form over function as it seems not very versatile to accommodate changing needs and increasing passenger numbers. As part of the ORD 21 program, both T1 and T3 are supposed to get overhauls. Those plans have not been released, and they may still be in preliminary stages. It appears that all check-ins will be handled at the new global terminal replacing T2, thereby freeing up space in T1 and 3. I have no info on what will happen to these areas, but I do suspect that more of the original T1 design is vulnerable. Other major HJ projects in.Chicago are also vulnerable now too, such as the State of Illinois Building. As for ORD, the T1 design is no longer conducive to how the airport will be transformed. There will be more changes to it. That’s about all we really know for now.

That would be big if true, and would allow for tons of new amenities in T1 and T3. Do you have a source for this?

MLIAA wrote:

AAplat4life wrote:

glbltrvlr wrote:

If CDA had left it as Helmut designed it, I would agree with you. I just get annoyed and depressed when I walk though it now. They should rip out all the popup stores and booths that encroach on the walkways and make it impossible to pass. Gate overflows into the walkway is almost as bad and the amount of space TSA has taken is crazy. CDA has destroyed what was a beautiful facility.

ORD T1 was designed for an era when airports functioned differently. Certainly it was breathtaking when it first opened, but that was before TSA screenings and airlines minimizing onboard food service. So airports needed to make room for food vendors. Ultimately the design of T1 has proven itself to be form over function as it seems not very versatile to accommodate changing needs and increasing passenger numbers. As part of the ORD 21 program, both T1 and T3 are supposed to get overhauls. Those plans have not been released, and they may still be in preliminary stages. It appears that all check-ins will be handled at the new global terminal replacing T2, thereby freeing up space in T1 and 3. I have no info on what will happen to these areas, but I do suspect that more of the original T1 design is vulnerable. Other major HJ projects in.Chicago are also vulnerable now too, such as the State of Illinois Building. As for ORD, the T1 design is no longer conducive to how the airport will be transformed. There will be more changes to it. That’s about all we really know for now.

That would be big if true, and would allow for tons of new amenities in T1 and T3. Do you have a source for this?

Regarding check-ins being handled in T2, that is my recollection when the new global terminal T2 was announced. At this point, however, the city is being somewhat vague on the new T2 and what will happen to T1 and T3.


https://ord21.com/projects/Pages/O'Hare ... minal.aspx

AAplat4life wrote:

glbltrvlr wrote:

United787 wrote:

I am surprised the passing of Helmut Jahn didn’t get more attention on this forum.

His design for United’s Terminal 1 at ORD was (and still is) a monumental piece of architecture. The completion of T1 was a major turning point in the design of airports, not only in this country but around the world. I remember Jahn explaining his inspiration for T1 being the grand light filled spaces of Europe’s train stations. The feeling he achieved at T1 still seems to be the goal in airport designs being built all over the globe. Compare that to the low ceiling utilitarian designs of the late 60s, 70s and early 80s.

Traveling through T1 never gets old for me. When I arrive there from home, my mood changes as soon as I set foot inside. No matter how busy and crowded it can be, the space calms me and lifts me up.

If CDA had left it as Helmut designed it, I would agree with you. I just get annoyed and depressed when I walk though it now. They should rip out all the popup stores and booths that encroach on the walkways and make it impossible to pass. Gate overflows into the walkway is almost as bad and the amount of space TSA has taken is crazy. CDA has destroyed what was a beautiful facility.

ORD T1 was designed for an era when airports functioned differently. Certainly it was breathtaking when it first opened, but that was before TSA screenings and airlines minimizing onboard food service. So airports needed to make room for food vendors. Ultimately the design of T1 has proven itself to be form over function as it seems not very versatile to accommodate changing needs and increasing passenger numbers. As part of the ORD 21 program, both T1 and T3 are supposed to get overhauls. Those plans have not been released, and they may still be in preliminary stages. It appears that all check-ins will be handled at the new global terminal replacing T2, thereby freeing up space in T1 and 3. I have no info on what will happen to these areas, but I do suspect that more of the original T1 design is vulnerable. Other major HJ projects in.Chicago are also vulnerable now too, such as the State of Illinois Building. As for ORD, the T1 design is no longer conducive to how the airport will be transformed. There will be more changes to it. That’s about all we really know for now.

You mind I ask where you got the info about the check-ins being centralized into the new Global T2? That would certainly be interesting as it would free up tons of room in T1 and T3. I would find this hard to believe this could be carried out though given that crush of drop-offs and cars that the new T2 would face. Not to mention the crowding by funneling all three terminals check-ins into the building.

tootshibbard wrote:

You mind I ask where you got the info about the check-ins being centralized into the new Global T2? That would certainly be interesting as it would free up tons of room in T1 and T3. I would find this hard to believe this could be carried out though given that crush of drop-offs and cars that the new T2 would face. Not to mention the crowding by funneling all three terminals check-ins into the building.

The rendering here shows T1 and T2 as a connected structure, so it would make perfect sense to have single point screening in the new T2. I wouldn't hold my breath though. The plan is to start with the satellite terminals first, so it will be decades before they get around to the new T2 common check-in area.

https://www.ord21.com/home/Pages/default.aspx

glbltrvlr wrote:

tootshibbard wrote:

You mind I ask where you got the info about the check-ins being centralized into the new Global T2? That would certainly be interesting as it would free up tons of room in T1 and T3. I would find this hard to believe this could be carried out though given that crush of drop-offs and cars that the new T2 would face. Not to mention the crowding by funneling all three terminals check-ins into the building.

The rendering here shows T1 and T2 as a connected structure, so it would make perfect sense to have single point screening in the new T2. I wouldn't hold my breath though. The plan is to start with the satellite terminals first, so it will be decades before they get around to the new T2 common check-in area.

https://www.ord21.com/home/Pages/default.aspx

It should be under a decade and this allows for some delays. The original announcements said that UA, AA and their alliance partners would consolidate operations in the new T2 global terminal. But designs were only preliminary and things can change. T2 construction is supposed to start in 2024 once T5 renovation is done and DL moves to T5.

glbltrvlr wrote:

tootshibbard wrote:

You mind I ask where you got the info about the check-ins being centralized into the new Global T2? That would certainly be interesting as it would free up tons of room in T1 and T3. I would find this hard to believe this could be carried out though given that crush of drop-offs and cars that the new T2 would face. Not to mention the crowding by funneling all three terminals check-ins into the building.

The rendering here shows T1 and T2 as a connected structure, so it would make perfect sense to have single point screening in the new T2. I wouldn't hold my breath though. The plan is to start with the satellite terminals first, so it will be decades before they get around to the new T2 common check-in area.

https://www.ord21.com/home/Pages/default.aspx

The rendering (https://www.ord21.com/home/Pages/default.aspx), including satellites 1 & 2 (T-5 not shown but counted), appears to show only 168 gates (based on my eyeball count). According to Wikipedia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/O%27Hare_ ... 91%20gates) O'Hare presently has 191 gates. When 9R - 27L is completed, demand for gate space will, hopefully post-pandemic, increase substantially. Billion$ for a decrease in gates does not make sense. Is the rendering not accurate? What am I missing?

Elkadad313 wrote:

glbltrvlr wrote:

tootshibbard wrote:

You mind I ask where you got the info about the check-ins being centralized into the new Global T2? That would certainly be interesting as it would free up tons of room in T1 and T3. I would find this hard to believe this could be carried out though given that crush of drop-offs and cars that the new T2 would face. Not to mention the crowding by funneling all three terminals check-ins into the building.

The rendering here shows T1 and T2 as a connected structure, so it would make perfect sense to have single point screening in the new T2. I wouldn't hold my breath though. The plan is to start with the satellite terminals first, so it will be decades before they get around to the new T2 common check-in area.

https://www.ord21.com/home/Pages/default.aspx

The rendering (https://www.ord21.com/home/Pages/default.aspx), including satellites 1 & 2 (T-5 not shown but counted), appears to show only 168 gates (based on my eyeball count). According to Wikipedia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/O%27Hare_ ... 91%20gates) O'Hare presently has 191 gates. When 9R - 27L is completed, demand for gate space will, hopefully post-pandemic, increase substantially. Billion$ for a decrease in gates does not make sense. Is the rendering not accurate? What am I missing?

O'Hare currently has 191 gates of which they will lose 27 when Terminal 2 is demolished and 8 gates to Concourse B & C (4 each) in Terminal 1 for the connection expansion to OGT, which will bring them down to 156. T-5 is adding 10 in their expansion and the Concourse L stinger is adding 3. When the OGT is completed in the 30's, there will be 16 gates added to Concourse C or if you prefer Satellite 1; 24 gates will be added to an all new Concourse (D?) or Satellite 2 if you prefer. Finally the OGT will add 13 gates which will be connected to Concourse B. Some of those 13 might be considered Concourse B which will make the total number of gates in the OGT less. So with all the expansion, O'Hare will see net gain of 31 gates to bring it to a grand total of 222. Now some of these gate totals might change either positively or negatively based on actual construction, costs, demand, etc. However, I do believe that if they reduce the expansion of OGT it will still have the ability to expand later on should the city want/need it.

piedmontf284000 wrote:

Elkadad313 wrote:

glbltrvlr wrote:

The rendering here shows T1 and T2 as a connected structure, so it would make perfect sense to have single point screening in the new T2. I wouldn't hold my breath though. The plan is to start with the satellite terminals first, so it will be decades before they get around to the new T2 common check-in area.

https://www.ord21.com/home/Pages/default.aspx

The rendering (https://www.ord21.com/home/Pages/default.aspx), including satellites 1 & 2 (T-5 not shown but counted), appears to show only 168 gates (based on my eyeball count). According to Wikipedia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/O%27Hare_ ... 91%20gates) O'Hare presently has 191 gates. When 9R - 27L is completed, demand for gate space will, hopefully post-pandemic, increase substantially. Billion$ for a decrease in gates does not make sense. Is the rendering not accurate? What am I missing?

O'Hare currently has 191 gates of which they will lose 27 when Terminal 2 is demolished and 8 gates to Concourse B & C (4 each) in Terminal 1 for the connection expansion to OGT, which will bring them down to 156. T-5 is adding 10 in their expansion and the Concourse L stinger is adding 3. When the OGT is completed in the 30's, there will be 16 gates added to Concourse C or if you prefer Satellite 1; 24 gates will be added to an all new Concourse (D?) or Satellite 2 if you prefer. Finally the OGT will add 13 gates which will be connected to Concourse B. Some of those 13 might be considered Concourse B which will make the total number of gates in the OGT less. So with all the expansion, O'Hare will see net gain of 31 gates to bring it to a grand total of 222. Now some of these gate totals might change either positively or negatively based on actual construction, costs, demand, etc. However, I do believe that if they reduce the expansion of OGT it will still have the ability to expand later on should the city want/need it.

Thx for the update.

piedmontf284000 wrote:

Elkadad313 wrote:

glbltrvlr wrote:

The rendering here shows T1 and T2 as a connected structure, so it would make perfect sense to have single point screening in the new T2. I wouldn't hold my breath though. The plan is to start with the satellite terminals first, so it will be decades before they get around to the new T2 common check-in area.

https://www.ord21.com/home/Pages/default.aspx

The rendering (https://www.ord21.com/home/Pages/default.aspx), including satellites 1 & 2 (T-5 not shown but counted), appears to show only 168 gates (based on my eyeball count). According to Wikipedia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/O%27Hare_ ... 91%20gates) O'Hare presently has 191 gates. When 9R - 27L is completed, demand for gate space will, hopefully post-pandemic, increase substantially. Billion$ for a decrease in gates does not make sense. Is the rendering not accurate? What am I missing?

O'Hare currently has 191 gates of which they will lose 27 when Terminal 2 is demolished and 8 gates to Concourse B & C (4 each) in Terminal 1 for the connection expansion to OGT, which will bring them down to 156. T-5 is adding 10 in their expansion and the Concourse L stinger is adding 3. When the OGT is completed in the 30's, there will be 16 gates added to Concourse C or if you prefer Satellite 1; 24 gates will be added to an all new Concourse (D?) or Satellite 2 if you prefer. Finally the OGT will add 13 gates which will be connected to Concourse B. Some of those 13 might be considered Concourse B which will make the total number of gates in the OGT less. So with all the expansion, O'Hare will see net gain of 31 gates to bring it to a grand total of 222. Now some of these gate totals might change either positively or negatively based on actual construction, costs, demand, etc. However, I do believe that if they reduce the expansion of OGT it will still have the ability to expand later on should the city want/need it.

Huge thank you for this write up!

Sorry, but, this still sounds like an incredibly complex and very expansive way to get net 18 extra gates(discounting the 13 new gates at Concourse L and T5 which are easy extensions).