Moderators: jsumali2, richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR

 
apodino
Topic Author
Posts: 4087
Joined: Mon Apr 04, 2005 2:11 am

ORD people mover

Sat Mar 06, 2021 7:12 pm

Does anyone have any clue on what is going on with this? This was supposed to be reopened in 2019 and now it’s 2021 and I can’t find anything on the status of this. The city won’t talk and any officials who are asked about this give evasive answers. This is not a good look for ORD and it’s even more of a burden on UA and AA since the buses that have replaced the people mover are subject to the same surface congestion that cars are.

The people that use ORD and the taxpayers deserve more answers and aren’t getting them. Meanwhile all the airside projects are going normally. Can we get some answers on the people mover please?
 
AirlineBob
Posts: 37
Joined: Wed Jun 17, 2015 10:53 pm

Re: ORD people mover

Sat Mar 06, 2021 7:44 pm

This is the most recent article I could find (from July 2020!).

I was actually at the ORD rental car center for the first time ever this week. After turning in a car on the upper level of the garage, you walk into the main building and go past the doors for the people mover. There was a small sign on one of the doors that said something along the lines of "Danger, High Voltage Testing in Progress." However, I couldn't tell if the signs had been up for a day, a week, a month, or more. You could just see the nose of one of the people mover trains parked there on the other side of the glass.

I've lived in Chicago for almost 15 years. I like to think the best of the city, but the People Mover just seems "par for the course" for Chicago. We like to talk a big game about being a "World Class City," and "The City of Big Shoulders," but apparently, fielding a train to run between airport terminals is just a insurmountable task.

It reminds me of when the Blue Line "L" train ran over the tracks and demolished the escalator at ORD. Thankfully, no one was killed. But the escalator was out of service for almost 18 months. An unforeseen accident for sure, but one would think it wouldn't take a year and a half to recover.
 
Tack
Posts: 217
Joined: Thu Oct 04, 2018 11:13 pm

Re: ORD people mover

Sat Mar 06, 2021 7:49 pm

apodino wrote:
Does anyone have any clue on what is going on with this? This was supposed to be reopened in 2019 and now it’s 2021 and I can’t find anything on the status of this. The city won’t talk and any officials who are asked about this give evasive answers. This is not a good look for ORD and it’s even more of a burden on UA and AA since the buses that have replaced the people mover are subject to the same surface congestion that cars are.

The people that use ORD and the taxpayers deserve more answers and aren’t getting them. Meanwhile all the airside projects are going normally. Can we get some answers on the people mover please?


That’s a fantastic Question. As an international gateway, ORD is horrible. My last trip there was on QR to BKK in 2019. Their shared lounge is horrible, the BA lounge? Horrible. I decided I’m done until they at least get the train back running so I can use the AA FL lounge. But over all, ORD kinda sucks.
 
ORDJOE
Posts: 684
Joined: Wed Aug 11, 2010 2:27 am

Re: ORD people mover

Sat Mar 06, 2021 8:38 pm

From my understanding the doors on the train cars do not line up with the doors on the station platform (there's a glass wall that separates the platform from the tracks) . How this will be fixed anyones guess but seems to be a mess up and to fix it something has to be rebuilt
 
AirlineBob
Posts: 37
Joined: Wed Jun 17, 2015 10:53 pm

Re: ORD people mover

Sat Mar 06, 2021 10:02 pm

ORDJOE wrote:
From my understanding the doors on the train cars do not line up with the doors on the station platform (there's a glass wall that separates the platform from the tracks) .


Have not heard that. If that's really the case, I'd love to hear more about it. It's those kind of basic-level screw ups that are the most fascinating.
 
Antarius
Posts: 3436
Joined: Thu Apr 13, 2017 1:27 pm

Re: ORD people mover

Sat Mar 06, 2021 11:02 pm

ORDJOE wrote:
From my understanding the doors on the train cars do not line up with the doors on the station platform (there's a glass wall that separates the platform from the tracks) . How this will be fixed anyones guess but seems to be a mess up and to fix it something has to be rebuilt


Did they hire the team from BER?
Militant Centrist
Let's all just use some common sense
 
Toinou
Posts: 350
Joined: Sun Apr 14, 2019 8:21 am

Re: ORD people mover

Sun Mar 07, 2021 7:50 am

From what I can read, the original system used french technology VAL, while the renovation did use compatible Bombardier-build trains. VAL system is efficient and reliable but tends to react less than ideally to alterations (there have been example of it in France, even though they often used new models by the same builder).
 
RDUDDJI
Posts: 2273
Joined: Fri Jun 04, 2004 4:42 am

Re: ORD people mover

Sun Mar 07, 2021 2:15 pm

I lived in Chicago for a few years. Wonderful city, horrible management. What I always found interesting is how some projects take decades, but others happen on a whim (like Daley bulldozing Meigs field overnight). When they decide to do something, it gets done, but everything else seems to languish indefinitely.
Sometimes we don't realize the good times when we're in them
 
sircygnus
Posts: 97
Joined: Mon Mar 13, 2017 3:46 pm

Re: ORD people mover

Sun Mar 07, 2021 2:44 pm

Mentioned this in the Chicago Aviation Thread, but the bids for an extension to the busing contract (buses being used in place of people mover) look to be opened sometime in March or April of this year. If they are just opening bids in the future, that leads me to believe these buses will be used for some time into the future.
 
jcwr56
Posts: 1045
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 11:36 am

Re: ORD people mover

Sun Mar 07, 2021 6:08 pm

sircygnus wrote:
Mentioned this in the Chicago Aviation Thread, but the bids for an extension to the busing contract (buses being used in place of people mover) look to be opened sometime in March or April of this year. If they are just opening bids in the future, that leads me to believe these buses will be used for some time into the future.


I wouldn't read into this too much. When the ATS gets back up and running, the buses will be there for backup in the event something does goes wrong.
 
apodino
Topic Author
Posts: 4087
Joined: Mon Apr 04, 2005 2:11 am

Re: ORD people mover

Mon Mar 08, 2021 1:24 am

Dear me....who knows what to make and what a fiasco. So what I wonder is if there are more issues, why doesnt the CDOA just come right out and address them honestly rather than dodge questions? People respect honesty way more than evasive answers. Why is it so hard to give timelines and updates on this? Also, if I am Lori Lightfoot, I am furious and I am demanding answers to this. Will Lori Lightfoot put more pressure on the CDOA going forward, especially as we recover from COVID?
 
BarrenLucidity
Posts: 22
Joined: Sun Jun 28, 2020 10:29 am

Re: ORD people mover

Mon Mar 08, 2021 1:49 am

Tack wrote:
apodino wrote:
Does anyone have any clue on what is going on with this? This was supposed to be reopened in 2019 and now it’s 2021 and I can’t find anything on the status of this. The city won’t talk and any officials who are asked about this give evasive answers. This is not a good look for ORD and it’s even more of a burden on UA and AA since the buses that have replaced the people mover are subject to the same surface congestion that cars are.

The people that use ORD and the taxpayers deserve more answers and aren’t getting them. Meanwhile all the airside projects are going normally. Can we get some answers on the people mover please?


That’s a fantastic Question. As an international gateway, ORD is horrible. My last trip there was on QR to BKK in 2019. Their shared lounge is horrible, the BA lounge? Horrible. I decided I’m done until they at least get the train back running so I can use the AA FL lounge. But over all, ORD kinda sucks.


ORD is a cruel joke to the weary international traveller.
 
Runway765
Posts: 379
Joined: Sun Feb 07, 2021 1:21 am

Re: ORD people mover

Mon Mar 08, 2021 2:19 am

BarrenLucidity wrote:
Tack wrote:
apodino wrote:
Does anyone have any clue on what is going on with this? This was supposed to be reopened in 2019 and now it’s 2021 and I can’t find anything on the status of this. The city won’t talk and any officials who are asked about this give evasive answers. This is not a good look for ORD and it’s even more of a burden on UA and AA since the buses that have replaced the people mover are subject to the same surface congestion that cars are.

The people that use ORD and the taxpayers deserve more answers and aren’t getting them. Meanwhile all the airside projects are going normally. Can we get some answers on the people mover please?


That’s a fantastic Question. As an international gateway, ORD is horrible. My last trip there was on QR to BKK in 2019. Their shared lounge is horrible, the BA lounge? Horrible. I decided I’m done until they at least get the train back running so I can use the AA FL lounge. But over all, ORD kinda sucks.


ORD is a cruel joke to the weary international traveller.


ORD is a joke period. They are just completing things now that should have been done 30 years ago. Chicago is a great city, but the higher than average political corruption is killing it. It really is a shame.
 
kiowa
Posts: 885
Joined: Wed Jun 08, 2011 12:37 am

Re: ORD people mover

Mon Mar 08, 2021 2:20 am

BarrenLucidity wrote:
Tack wrote:
apodino wrote:
Does anyone have any clue on what is going on with this? This was supposed to be reopened in 2019 and now it’s 2021 and I can’t find anything on the status of this. The city won’t talk and any officials who are asked about this give evasive answers. This is not a good look for ORD and it’s even more of a burden on UA and AA since the buses that have replaced the people mover are subject to the same surface congestion that cars are.

The people that use ORD and the taxpayers deserve more answers and aren’t getting them. Meanwhile all the airside projects are going normally. Can we get some answers on the people mover please?


That’s a fantastic Question. As an international gateway, ORD is horrible. My last trip there was on QR to BKK in 2019. Their shared lounge is horrible, the BA lounge? Horrible. I decided I’m done until they at least get the train back running so I can use the AA FL lounge. But over all, ORD kinda sucks.


ORD is a cruel joke to the weary international traveller.


ORD is great for international travel except for the people mover and the total lack of management/leadership with the customs employees.
 
Runway765
Posts: 379
Joined: Sun Feb 07, 2021 1:21 am

Re: ORD people mover

Mon Mar 08, 2021 2:23 am

kiowa wrote:
BarrenLucidity wrote:
Tack wrote:

That’s a fantastic Question. As an international gateway, ORD is horrible. My last trip there was on QR to BKK in 2019. Their shared lounge is horrible, the BA lounge? Horrible. I decided I’m done until they at least get the train back running so I can use the AA FL lounge. But over all, ORD kinda sucks.


ORD is a cruel joke to the weary international traveller.


ORD is great for international travel except for the people mover and the total lack of management/leadership with the customs employees.


How is ORD good for international travel? Isn’t it the only major hub airport where you can’t (for the most part) go international > domestic airside? That’s a joke for as busy of an airport as ORD.
 
apodino
Topic Author
Posts: 4087
Joined: Mon Apr 04, 2005 2:11 am

Re: ORD people mover

Mon Mar 08, 2021 2:58 am

Runway765 wrote:
kiowa wrote:
BarrenLucidity wrote:

ORD is a cruel joke to the weary international traveller.


ORD is great for international travel except for the people mover and the total lack of management/leadership with the customs employees.


How is ORD good for international travel? Isn’t it the only major hub airport where you can’t (for the most part) go international > domestic airside? That’s a joke for as busy of an airport as ORD.


You can’t go international to domestic airside at any airport because after you clear customs you have to clear TSA. That being said ORD is one of two major airports in the US (BOS is the other, save for the Terminal C gates) where the gates in the international terminal post TSA are not connected airside to the domestic gates. If ORD had the people mover, this would not be a big deal. Without the people mover, it’s a big deal.
 
mhockey31091
Posts: 83
Joined: Mon Apr 12, 2010 8:05 am

Re: ORD people mover

Mon Mar 08, 2021 5:06 am

Runway765 wrote:
kiowa wrote:
BarrenLucidity wrote:

ORD is a cruel joke to the weary international traveller.


ORD is great for international travel except for the people mover and the total lack of management/leadership with the customs employees.


How is ORD good for international travel? Isn’t it the only major hub airport where you can’t (for the most part) go international > domestic airside? That’s a joke for as busy of an airport as ORD.

I'm 99% sure that every time I come back from a trip abroad to any US airport I have to clear customs and then go through security to get back into the terminal. DTW, SFO, LAX, or ORD.
 
Elementalism
Posts: 658
Joined: Sat Jun 10, 2017 4:03 am

Re: ORD people mover

Mon Mar 08, 2021 6:03 am

It is called the windy city for a reason, and it isnt the wind.
 
User avatar
b787900
Posts: 41
Joined: Wed Sep 07, 2011 5:49 am

Re: ORD people mover

Mon Mar 08, 2021 11:28 am

kiowa wrote:
BarrenLucidity wrote:
Tack wrote:

That’s a fantastic Question. As an international gateway, ORD is horrible. My last trip there was on QR to BKK in 2019. Their shared lounge is horrible, the BA lounge? Horrible. I decided I’m done until they at least get the train back running so I can use the AA FL lounge. But over all, ORD kinda sucks.


ORD is a cruel joke to the weary international traveller.


ORD is great for international travel except for the people mover and the total lack of management/leadership with the customs employees.


Agree. :checkmark: Used ORD plenty of times. Great airport! It's unfortunate that something as simple and essential as a people mover hasn't been fixed to this day. Astounding really. Otherwise, the airport had always been a pleasure to fly into/out or transit through.
Flew in: 717, 732-7M9, 744, 74H, 752, 753, 762, 763, 764, 772, 77L, 77W, 788, 789, 781, 223, 313, 318, 319, 32D, 320, 32A, 32N, 321, 32B, 32Q, 332, 333, 343, 346, 359, 351, 388, M11, M88, ER3, ER4, E70, E75, E90, E95, CR2, CR7, CR9, F50, F70, AN-24, TU5
 
drdisque
Posts: 1465
Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2007 9:57 am

Re: ORD people mover

Mon Mar 08, 2021 3:44 pm

apodino wrote:
Runway765 wrote:
kiowa wrote:

ORD is great for international travel except for the people mover and the total lack of management/leadership with the customs employees.


How is ORD good for international travel? Isn’t it the only major hub airport where you can’t (for the most part) go international > domestic airside? That’s a joke for as busy of an airport as ORD.


You can’t go international to domestic airside at any airport because after you clear customs you have to clear TSA. That being said ORD is one of two major airports in the US (BOS is the other, save for the Terminal C gates) where the gates in the international terminal post TSA are not connected airside to the domestic gates. If ORD had the people mover, this would not be a big deal. Without the people mover, it’s a big deal.


And to be fair, probably about 90% of BOS Domestic->International connections out of E pax arrive into Terminal C on B6.
 
sircygnus
Posts: 97
Joined: Mon Mar 13, 2017 3:46 pm

Re: ORD people mover

Mon Mar 08, 2021 5:28 pm

jcwr56 wrote:
sircygnus wrote:
Mentioned this in the Chicago Aviation Thread, but the bids for an extension to the busing contract (buses being used in place of people mover) look to be opened sometime in March or April of this year. If they are just opening bids in the future, that leads me to believe these buses will be used for some time into the future.


I wouldn't read into this too much. When the ATS gets back up and running, the buses will be there for backup in the event something does goes wrong.

I was hoping you'd say that. While my experiences with the buses have been generally good, the people mover is certainly needed and missed.
 
ckfred
Posts: 5200
Joined: Wed Apr 25, 2001 12:50 pm

Re: ORD people mover

Mon Mar 08, 2021 6:44 pm

ORDJOE wrote:
From my understanding the doors on the train cars do not line up with the doors on the station platform (there's a glass wall that separates the platform from the tracks) . How this will be fixed anyones guess but seems to be a mess up and to fix it something has to be rebuilt


Is this for all stations or just the new station in the rental car/long-term parking garage?

Ideally, the glass panels and doors in the stations are removed, remeasured, and replaced with new panels and doors. But, I'm sure that is a fix that takes quite some time.

The primary reason that both the City and the contractor are being so quiet is that there will be a lot of litigation, once the project is complete. Both sides have pointed fingers at each other. The City has also said that Covid-19 has made it difficult for foreign employees of the contractor, engineering firm, equipment manufacturer, etc. to get to Chicago to work on the site. Having been a practicing lawyer in Chicago, the litigation will probably take longer to settle or reach a jury verdict that the time from when the project started to completion.

What is the $64,000 question is what happens to the old surface lots and the old long-term parking station? I've read that most of the surface lots will be closed, or that the station will be torn down, or the lots will be reconfigured to move the cashbox. Part of these rumors have to do with the fact that the new 27C-9C basically lines up with the station and the cashbox, and that both structures are too tall for the FAA. Now, I can see the cashbox being shortened. The station presents an issue. But, buses can certainly ferry people to the rental car garage.

The other $64,000 question is what the City plans to do with the old surface rental car lots? That seems to be prime real estate, even if any structure has to be limited in height. Yet, the City is mum as to what will be done with them. I'm sure there is some haz-mat work that must be done, considering there are fuel tanks and maintenance facilities.
 
muralir
Posts: 161
Joined: Mon May 27, 2013 3:44 pm

Re: ORD people mover

Mon Mar 08, 2021 8:55 pm

ORDJOE wrote:
From my understanding the doors on the train cars do not line up with the doors on the station platform (there's a glass wall that separates the platform from the tracks) . How this will be fixed anyones guess but seems to be a mess up and to fix it something has to be rebuilt


Holy cow. If this is true, it ranks up there in stupidity with the Mars Climate Orbiter being lost due to one team using metric and the other team using english measurements. Seriously, how does something like that happen?

From the Chicago Aviation Thread, it's also been mentioned that the people mover is a relatively nonstandard mover, and so much of the work is custom. Of course, that doesn't excuse the fiasco it's become. For the time and expense it's taken, it probably would have been quicker to rip the previous rails out and install a complete, new system rather than try to adapt new cars and control systems to the old rails.

Also, why is it that every post about the people mover turns into a thread to bash the whole city? I may be biased since Chicago is my hometown (though I don't live there any longer), but stop parroting whatever random news article about Chi-raq you've read. It doesn't help understand how this project went so off the rails (pun intended :-)

As another poster mentioned, Chicago has done a phenomenal job with the massive airside construction. They've basically built an entirely new runway complex, adding the capacity of JFK to an already large airport without interrupting flights ops. This when most airports consider it a major accomplishment to add one runway. And they've done it largely on budget and on time.

FWIW, here's a list of other projects that the CDA has completed, largely on-time and on-budget:
* MDW's terminal complex upgrading and expansion over the years, still ongoing, but on-time and on-budget.
* The T5 expansion, while still fairly early, appears to be progressing well.
* The consolidated rental car facility (it's nearly the square footage of the entire terminal complex)
* Expansion and relocation of cargo facilities

The point is that there are plenty of ambitious projects that the city has completed well. Which makes it all the more puzzling why a project that's orders of magnitude simpler has been botched so thoroughly.
 
muralir
Posts: 161
Joined: Mon May 27, 2013 3:44 pm

Re: ORD people mover

Mon Mar 08, 2021 9:03 pm

Runway765 wrote:
BarrenLucidity wrote:
Tack wrote:

That’s a fantastic Question. As an international gateway, ORD is horrible. My last trip there was on QR to BKK in 2019. Their shared lounge is horrible, the BA lounge? Horrible. I decided I’m done until they at least get the train back running so I can use the AA FL lounge. But over all, ORD kinda sucks.


ORD is a cruel joke to the weary international traveller.


ORD is a joke period. They are just completing things now that should have been done 30 years ago. Chicago is a great city, but the higher than average political corruption is killing it. It really is a shame.


I agree about ORD not being optimal for domestic->international connections (and less so, but still inconvenient for int->domestic connections, since you have to clear customs regardless of airport). When the new terminal complex is done (Admittedly a long way off), this will be much, much improved.

You're right about things happening now that should have been done 30 years ago. The reason for that was political gridlock: the city has always been Democratic, but the state govt was reliably Republican for much of the 80s and 90s. Which meant gridlock on big issues like airport expansion (the Republicans controlling Springfield didn't want such a huge pork barrel project to benefit the Democrats controlling the city; this is why they wanted to build a brand new airport in Peotone i.e. Republican-controlled suburbs, instead). Once the state govt. came under Democratic control, all those delayed projects suddenly got greenlit. I seriously can't think of another major airport worldwide undergoing as much expansion, upgrading, and reconfiguration as O'Hare right now (Although there are of course brand new airports being built). The terminal expansion is the last big piece to fall into place. It'll probably take another 10 years to complete (although big chunks will come online in the next 5 or so). But by then, ORD should have caught up after basically losing a few decades. And who knows, maybe the people mover might even be done by then ;-)
 
NickLAX
Posts: 292
Joined: Wed Jun 12, 2013 8:48 pm

Re: ORD people mover

Mon Mar 08, 2021 9:34 pm

I did SNA-ORD-(Intl) a lot before the pandemic - with AA and UA no terminal changes as Intl departures are in the same terminal - departures rarely ever an issue. Arrivals are the hell and generally I avoided connecting through ORD on ARRIVING into the US. If I did I generally made it a day or two stopover for meetings or a longer than 3 hour connection window.

AA in their terminals had a bus to T5 running BEFORE the pandemic airside to allow for connections to partners like BA/AY/CX, etc
 
MIflyer12
Posts: 9852
Joined: Mon Feb 18, 2013 11:58 pm

Re: ORD people mover

Mon Mar 08, 2021 9:44 pm

People must lack things to complain about. May I point you to the clusters that were the DEN opening, the budget for LHR T5, or the entirety of BER?
 
User avatar
mke717spotter
Posts: 2236
Joined: Thu Dec 01, 2005 9:32 am

Re: ORD people mover

Mon Mar 08, 2021 9:50 pm

ckfred wrote:
What is the $64,000 question is what happens to the old surface lots and the old long-term parking station? I've read that most of the surface lots will be closed, or that the station will be torn down, or the lots will be reconfigured to move the cashbox.

I was similarly wondering if there are there plans to re-open the E parking lot and if the ATS will still stop there. I noticed that lot has been shuttered for a while and I wasn't sure if it was just until travel starts to pick up again.
Will you watch the Cleveland Browns and the Detroit Lions on Sunday? Only if coach Eric Mangini resigned after a loss.
 
BEG2IAH
Posts: 1030
Joined: Thu Apr 22, 2004 3:42 pm

Re: ORD people mover

Mon Mar 08, 2021 10:13 pm

People Mover is a total joke like many other infrastructure projects in and around Chicago. They are, without exception, overpriced, over budget, delayed, and corruption's ugly head creeps up from all of them.

One thing that's absolutely unacceptable are buckets used for rainwater collection and this happens every single time when it rains. This has been going on for years. Another thing are restrooms with smelly drains and faucets that leak out 2 ml of water per minute. I'm all for conservation, but we are sitting on Michigan Lake...
Flying at the cruising altitude is (mostly) boring. I wish all flights were nothing but endless take offs and landings every 10 minutes or so.
 
luckyone
Posts: 4012
Joined: Thu Aug 21, 2008 1:50 pm

Re: ORD people mover

Mon Mar 08, 2021 10:18 pm

Having done the connection with both the people mover and the bus...from a passenger perspective I don't see what all the fuss is about. You go up the escalator and get on the people mover, or you walk over to the tented area and get on the bus. The plus of the bus is you are actually dropped right at the door and it's a slightly quicker walker and avoids the escalators. Either way one has to be transported from 5 over to the other terminals. What is it, a few extra minutes? Transfers to T1 are quicker than they would be with the people mover (it being the last stop) and transfers to T3 are now a few minutes longer (previously being the first stop). Now, from a project management standpoint yes it's a problem, but I can't say I noticed any difference as a passenger.
 
PhilMcCrackin
Posts: 379
Joined: Mon Jun 24, 2019 11:54 pm

Re: ORD people mover

Mon Mar 08, 2021 10:41 pm

kiowa wrote:
BarrenLucidity wrote:
Tack wrote:

That’s a fantastic Question. As an international gateway, ORD is horrible. My last trip there was on QR to BKK in 2019. Their shared lounge is horrible, the BA lounge? Horrible. I decided I’m done until they at least get the train back running so I can use the AA FL lounge. But over all, ORD kinda sucks.


ORD is a cruel joke to the weary international traveller.


ORD is great for international travel except for the people mover and the total lack of management/leadership with the customs employees.


It's not bad if you're departing international out of the AA or UA concourses, but the international terminal is trash and it's a bit of a pain having to arrive at the international terminal and then having to change terminals to reconnect, especially with the people mover not working.
 
Tack
Posts: 217
Joined: Thu Oct 04, 2018 11:13 pm

Re: ORD people mover

Tue Mar 09, 2021 1:23 am

PhilMcCrackin wrote:
kiowa wrote:
BarrenLucidity wrote:

ORD is a cruel joke to the weary international traveller.


ORD is great for international travel except for the people mover and the total lack of management/leadership with the customs employees.


It's not bad if you're departing international out of the AA or UA concourses, but the international terminal is trash and it's a bit of a pain having to arrive at the international terminal and then having to change terminals to reconnect, especially with the people mover not working.


Agree. I was using the international terminal for QR flights. For a few years before COVID, QR had some of their best J class pricing out of ORD, so it made the extra leg from LAX worth it. But after my last departure and arrival out of that toilet of an international terminal, I’ve given up on using ORD as a gateway. As jacked up as LAX can be entering and exiting? TBIT is a world class facility, that might actually have an operating rail system before ORD completes theirs. It’s all subjective for sure, but the ORD experience, as an Intl gateway is a PIA.
 
ckfred
Posts: 5200
Joined: Wed Apr 25, 2001 12:50 pm

Re: ORD people mover

Tue Mar 09, 2021 3:06 am

Back in the late 1990s or early 2000s, after the third airport was set for Peotone rather than on the site of the old steel mills near the Indiana border, Mayor Rich Daley came up with a proposal for 6 terminals at ORD.

The current T1 would be for UA domestic.
The current T2 would be UA international plus Star Alliance.
The current T3 would be for AA domestic.
A new T4, connected to T3, would be for AA international and Oneworld.
The current T5 would be for Skyteam and unaffiliated international carriers.
A new T6 would be for the likes of DL, TW, US, CO, and any other domestic carrier not named American or United.

My understanding is that all of the carriers at ORD had to sign off on this plan, and Northwest balked. NW saw that the current terminal layout was inferior to its operations at DTW and MSP and realized it could keep ORD at a competitive disadvantage.

At the same time, T5 opened 8 years before 9/11, when security was less of a hassle.

Here's the real issue. Most airports have 2 transit systems. One moves people between terminals or concourses. The other connects the terminal(s), with parking and/or rental cars.

ORD's train system tries to do both. So, it has to be outside of security. That makes connections tough.
 
Electra
Posts: 22
Joined: Tue Oct 22, 2019 7:58 am

Re: ORD people mover

Tue Mar 09, 2021 11:57 am

Has there ever been any talk of a customs facility in the central terminal area (T1/2/3)? I seem to recall reading something about it once. Surely that would not only make for a more streamlined passenger experience, but would also benefit AA and UA by removing the need for towing aircraft from T5 after arriving from international destinations.
 
United1
Posts: 4284
Joined: Wed Oct 08, 2003 9:21 am

Re: ORD people mover

Tue Mar 09, 2021 1:49 pm

Electra wrote:
Has there ever been any talk of a customs facility in the central terminal area (T1/2/3)? I seem to recall reading something about it once. Surely that would not only make for a more streamlined passenger experience, but would also benefit AA and UA by removing the need for towing aircraft from T5 after arriving from international destinations.


T2 is slated to be replaced by a new terminal building that will have customs ect. UA, AA and their partners will be the primary users.

https://ord21.com/projects/Pages/O%27Ha ... minal.aspx

I don't know what the status of this project is in a post covid world but hopefully it's still in the works.
I know the voices in my head aren't real but sometimes their ideas are just awesome!!!
 
burnsie28
Posts: 5304
Joined: Mon Aug 02, 2004 1:49 am

Re: ORD people mover

Tue Mar 09, 2021 2:22 pm

apodino wrote:
Runway765 wrote:
kiowa wrote:

ORD is great for international travel except for the people mover and the total lack of management/leadership with the customs employees.


How is ORD good for international travel? Isn’t it the only major hub airport where you can’t (for the most part) go international > domestic airside? That’s a joke for as busy of an airport as ORD.


You can’t go international to domestic airside at any airport because after you clear customs you have to clear TSA. That being said ORD is one of two major airports in the US (BOS is the other, save for the Terminal C gates) where the gates in the international terminal post TSA are not connected airside to the domestic gates. If ORD had the people mover, this would not be a big deal. Without the people mover, it’s a big deal.


Perhaps the poster was referring to airports similar to DTW, MSP, ATL, DFW, PHL where you can go from INTL to TSA to Domestic Airside without being forced to go non-airside. All of those airports you can connect without leaving the airside in some effect as the TSA checkpoint can only be reached by international arrivals.
 
gwrudolph
Posts: 565
Joined: Sat Sep 13, 2008 3:46 pm

Re: ORD people mover

Tue Mar 09, 2021 2:29 pm

BEG2IAH wrote:
People Mover is a total joke like many other infrastructure projects in and around Chicago. They are, without exception, overpriced, over budget, delayed, and corruption's ugly head creeps up from all of them.

One thing that's absolutely unacceptable are buckets used for rainwater collection and this happens every single time when it rains. This has been going on for years. Another thing are restrooms with smelly drains and faucets that leak out 2 ml of water per minute. I'm all for conservation, but we are sitting on Michigan Lake...


Yep the City of Chicago does an awful job at maintaining ORD terminals. On the outside, the flashing is all pollution stained from years of neglect. The leaking roofs and stained ceilings are something to be seen, and the bathrooms are disgusting. The elevators in the parking garages are from a horror movie. They just don’t maintain anything properly in that airport.
 
icareflies
Posts: 38
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2007 9:52 am

Re: ORD people mover

Tue Mar 09, 2021 2:34 pm

I have asked the question to my Alderman office last week and the answer I received was that "All live testing has been pushed to later this year due to COVID".
AF777-300ER and 9W737-900 - Love it! Love it
 
Electra
Posts: 22
Joined: Tue Oct 22, 2019 7:58 am

Re: ORD people mover

Tue Mar 09, 2021 3:28 pm

United1 wrote:
Electra wrote:
Has there ever been any talk of a customs facility in the central terminal area (T1/2/3)? I seem to recall reading something about it once. Surely that would not only make for a more streamlined passenger experience, but would also benefit AA and UA by removing the need for towing aircraft from T5 after arriving from international destinations.


T2 is slated to be replaced by a new terminal building that will have customs ect. UA, AA and their partners will be the primary users.

https://ord21.com/projects/Pages/O%27Ha ... minal.aspx

I don't know what the status of this project is in a post covid world but hopefully it's still in the works.



Thanks for sharing that link :)
Looks very impressive, hopefully it goes ahead.
 
copter808
Posts: 1385
Joined: Sat Dec 30, 2000 1:14 pm

Re: ORD people mover

Tue Mar 09, 2021 3:36 pm

Relax folks, this is Chicago, “The City that Works". It just doesn’t work very well. There is a moving walkway from the parking lot to the terminal that runs under the hotel. It has been out of service for 15 YEARS this May!!
 
ckfred
Posts: 5200
Joined: Wed Apr 25, 2001 12:50 pm

Re: ORD people mover

Tue Mar 09, 2021 4:36 pm

The first Mayor Daley (Richard J. Daley) used to boost that Chicago taxpayers never spend one dime on ORD and MDW. All of the funds to operate the airports came from landing fees, airline leases, concessions, and parking revenue. Obviously, additional revenue sources have come along, such as PFCs, federal grants, and such. But, there is no general tax revenue (property taxes and sales taxes) going into ORD and MDW. That is both a blessing and a curse. A blessing that taxpayers aren't footing the bills. People in the western suburbs used to gripe that property tax revenue was collected for DuPage Airport (DPA).

But, with so much infrastructure work going on, such as the runway projects, a lot of mundane stuff, like roof leaks and elevator upgrades, gets overlooked. It's nice that the main parking garage has brighter lighting and some lighting to indicate parking space availability. But, the elevator lobbies and elevators haven't changed much since the 1990s, when I used to take my girlfriend (now wife) to ORD. The office building where our dentist is located has done 2 lobby and elevator renovations in the last 17 years.

You have to figure that the reduced amount of passenger traffic over the past 13 months will delay the terminals projects and push off needed maintenance on the parking garage and terminals, because of the decreased revenue.
 
muralir
Posts: 161
Joined: Mon May 27, 2013 3:44 pm

Re: ORD people mover

Tue Mar 09, 2021 6:48 pm

gwrudolph wrote:
BEG2IAH wrote:
People Mover is a total joke like many other infrastructure projects in and around Chicago. They are, without exception, overpriced, over budget, delayed, and corruption's ugly head creeps up from all of them.

One thing that's absolutely unacceptable are buckets used for rainwater collection and this happens every single time when it rains. This has been going on for years. Another thing are restrooms with smelly drains and faucets that leak out 2 ml of water per minute. I'm all for conservation, but we are sitting on Michigan Lake...


Yep the City of Chicago does an awful job at maintaining ORD terminals. On the outside, the flashing is all pollution stained from years of neglect. The leaking roofs and stained ceilings are something to be seen, and the bathrooms are disgusting. The elevators in the parking garages are from a horror movie. They just don’t maintain anything properly in that airport.


I agree with you about T1. I remember when it opened it was amazing, with bright sunlight lighting up the whole terminal, wide concourses, and everything. But it's suffered from years of deferred maintenance. Now it just looks drab and dreary, which is quite a feat given that the entire roof is glass that's supposed to let sunlight through. And yeah, the buckets on the floors to collect rainwater is pretty embarrassing. T3 and T5 are better maintained, but part of the problem is all these terminals were designed in the pre-911 era. So besides the maintenance issues, they're just not designed for modern flows.

For example, the amount of retail and lounge space available is inadequate for the new reality where people come to airport much earlier for their flights. So they've stuck a bunch of kiosks on the concourse floors which makes the terminal feel even more cramped. And then you have a mismatch in check-in counters: in T1/2/3 with their largely domestic traffic, there's tons of empty counter space since few people check in luggage anymore. But in T5, which is primarily international, the counter space is always overflowing, because of all the new security screening equipment needed post 9/11.

I don't know if Chicago's politicians understand that for frequent business travelers, issues like ease of transits, lounge space, etc. *does* make a difference in what flights they select. Sure, VFR traffic that flies once a year doesn't really care, but those aren't the high dollar passengers that airlines care about, and that drive airlines to add new service. While ORD will always have a baseline level of connections due to its geographic advantages, it can't attract more service until the passenger experience is improved.

FWIW, while the maintenance of T1 is still a problem, the new terminal construction plan should address most of the rest of the issues. Replacing T2/3 with an integrated terminal for SA and OW, and designating T5 for all SkyTeam airlines will obviate the need for probably 90% of inter-terminal transfers, especially domestic<->international. While T5 won't be rebuilt, increasing its mix of domestic pax (by moving Delta and other carriers there, and moving international SA/OW flights out) will relieve the counterspace crowding in T5, while taking advantage of empty counterspace in the other terminals. Not to mention the horrendous TSA lines at T5 during the afternoon rush will be relieved when most transfers are done airside. Heck, even the people mover becomes a nonissue for connecting passengers if most of the transfers happen airside.

Overall, ORD has really suffered from decades of political gridlock, but in the past 10 years, that has been slowly addressed. IMHO, the hardest part is now complete (the runway configuration). ORD will soon have 8 runways, 6 of which are parallel. No other airport in the world has that capacity. And they did it on-time, on-budget, and without disrupting their massive operations. That could have easily been fubar'ed and set back the airport by another decade. Now that it's largely complete, if the terminal projects stay on track, most of the remaining issues will be resolved.
 
luckyone
Posts: 4012
Joined: Thu Aug 21, 2008 1:50 pm

Re: ORD people mover

Tue Mar 09, 2021 8:07 pm

ckfred wrote:


Here's the real issue. Most airports have 2 transit systems. One moves people between terminals or concourses. The other connects the terminal(s), with parking and/or rental cars.

ORD's train system tries to do both. So, it has to be outside of security. That makes connections tough.

I'm not sure I follow your logic here. ORD isn't an outlier here. Are the terminals shiny and new? No. But the domestic airsides are all connected to each other. The shape of the terminals themselves (granted built in a different era) means that passengers wouldn't benefit from any airside train. Given that most people are transferring within terminals 1 or 3, and perhaps 1-2, the distance is quite short. It doesn't need more than that as the only inter terminal transfers that would require a transit system are international-domestic, which by design are already outside security. Why build an extra system. And this is from somebody who's used O'Hare a lot.

Off the top of my head the major airports in the US:

ATL has the internal and one for rental car, but parking is foot or bus
ORD as above
JFK has Airtrain outside security that functions much like ORD
DFW has one, buses for rental
LAX has none
SFO has one that functions much like ORD, outside security
SEA has one behind security, buses to rental
MIA has one internal that doesn't even connect the entire airport and the MIA Mover which doesn't just function to serve rental car
IAH works the way you suggest having an airside and landside connector
DEN has one internal one and shuttles to rentals
DTW -- internal one concourse
MSP -- internal one concourse
IAD -- one poorly functioning internal people mover
EWR -- no rail connecting the terminals
LGA -- zilch
PHL -- nothing


So of the major US hubs, only ATL and IAH function the optimal way you suggest.
 
ryanov
Posts: 247
Joined: Sat Nov 03, 2012 4:38 am

Re: ORD people mover

Tue Mar 09, 2021 8:49 pm

What you say about EWR is incorrect. There is a monorail outside of security that goes between terminals, to rental cars and parking, and to transit.
 
apodino
Topic Author
Posts: 4087
Joined: Mon Apr 04, 2005 2:11 am

Re: ORD people mover

Tue Mar 09, 2021 9:03 pm

luckyone wrote:
ckfred wrote:


Here's the real issue. Most airports have 2 transit systems. One moves people between terminals or concourses. The other connects the terminal(s), with parking and/or rental cars.

ORD's train system tries to do both. So, it has to be outside of security. That makes connections tough.

I'm not sure I follow your logic here. ORD isn't an outlier here. Are the terminals shiny and new? No. But the domestic airsides are all connected to each other. The shape of the terminals themselves (granted built in a different era) means that passengers wouldn't benefit from any airside train. Given that most people are transferring within terminals 1 or 3, and perhaps 1-2, the distance is quite short. It doesn't need more than that as the only inter terminal transfers that would require a transit system are international-domestic, which by design are already outside security. Why build an extra system. And this is from somebody who's used O'Hare a lot.

Off the top of my head the major airports in the US:

ATL has the internal and one for rental car, but parking is foot or bus
ORD as above
JFK has Airtrain outside security that functions much like ORD
DFW has one, buses for rental
LAX has none
SFO has one that functions much like ORD, outside security
SEA has one behind security, buses to rental
MIA has one internal that doesn't even connect the entire airport and the MIA Mover which doesn't just function to serve rental car
IAH works the way you suggest having an airside and landside connector
DEN has one internal one and shuttles to rentals
DTW -- internal one concourse
MSP -- internal one concourse
IAD -- one poorly functioning internal people mover
EWR -- no rail connecting the terminals
LGA -- zilch
PHL -- nothing


So of the major US hubs, only ATL and IAH function the optimal way you suggest.


MSP also has one outside security that goes between the Light rail/rental car facility to the baggage claim-ticket counter landside, so it is also one that functions this way. The light rail itself acts as the shuttle between terminals.

EWR has the airtrain outside security that links the terminals with rental car and the Train Station.

MCO is also going in this direction with the airside trams, and also landside to the new transit center/south terminal.

PHX has one as well that links the terminals landside but the rental car link is still some time away.

TPA also has airside shuttles, dont know about landside.
 
luckyone
Posts: 4012
Joined: Thu Aug 21, 2008 1:50 pm

Re: ORD people mover

Tue Mar 09, 2021 9:18 pm

ryanov wrote:
What you say about EWR is incorrect. There is a monorail outside of security that goes between terminals, to rental cars and parking, and to transit.

Ahh thank you, I missed that one. I've only used EWR once. From what you describe it doesn't sound any different than ORD.
apodino wrote:
luckyone wrote:
ckfred wrote:


Here's the real issue. Most airports have 2 transit systems. One moves people between terminals or concourses. The other connects the terminal(s), with parking and/or rental cars.

ORD's train system tries to do both. So, it has to be outside of security. That makes connections tough.

I'm not sure I follow your logic here. ORD isn't an outlier here. Are the terminals shiny and new? No. But the domestic airsides are all connected to each other. The shape of the terminals themselves (granted built in a different era) means that passengers wouldn't benefit from any airside train. Given that most people are transferring within terminals 1 or 3, and perhaps 1-2, the distance is quite short. It doesn't need more than that as the only inter terminal transfers that would require a transit system are international-domestic, which by design are already outside security. Why build an extra system. And this is from somebody who's used O'Hare a lot.

Off the top of my head the major airports in the US:

ATL has the internal and one for rental car, but parking is foot or bus
ORD as above
JFK has Airtrain outside security that functions much like ORD
DFW has one, buses for rental
LAX has none
SFO has one that functions much like ORD, outside security
SEA has one behind security, buses to rental
MIA has one internal that doesn't even connect the entire airport and the MIA Mover which doesn't just function to serve rental car
IAH works the way you suggest having an airside and landside connector
DEN has one internal one and shuttles to rentals
DTW -- internal one concourse
MSP -- internal one concourse
IAD -- one poorly functioning internal people mover
EWR -- no rail connecting the terminals
LGA -- zilch
PHL -- nothing


So of the major US hubs, only ATL and IAH function the optimal way you suggest.


MSP also has one outside security that goes between the Light rail/rental car facility to the baggage claim-ticket counter landside, so it is also one that functions this way. The light rail itself acts as the shuttle between terminals.

EWR has the airtrain outside security that links the terminals with rental car and the Train Station.

MCO is also going in this direction with the airside trams, and also landside to the new transit center/south terminal.

PHX has one as well that links the terminals landside but the rental car link is still some time away.

TPA also has airside shuttles, dont know about landside.

Thanks sorry I missed PHX! Sounds like it's also quite similar to ORD.
MCO has always had a central hub to airside. Same with TPA. The trams do not connect the airsides to each other, and indeed there are two separate airsides at MCO and one cannot transit between all of the domestic concourses at MCO as one can at ORD. I'm not sure about the new South Terminal, but either way MCO doesn't function as a hub, so inter-concourse connectivity isn't much of an issue there.
RE: MSP -- I was referring to the writer's assertion that most airports have two separate but comprehensive transit systems, which makes ORD an outlier. You are correct about MSP's landside connections. I was simply referring to the inter-concourse connectivity, as suggested by the poster I quoted.

Thanks folks!
 
gwrudolph
Posts: 565
Joined: Sat Sep 13, 2008 3:46 pm

Re: ORD people mover

Tue Mar 09, 2021 9:20 pm

luckyone wrote:
ckfred wrote:


Here's the real issue. Most airports have 2 transit systems. One moves people between terminals or concourses. The other connects the terminal(s), with parking and/or rental cars.

ORD's train system tries to do both. So, it has to be outside of security. That makes connections tough.

I'm not sure I follow your logic here. ORD isn't an outlier here. Are the terminals shiny and new? No. But the domestic airsides are all connected to each other. The shape of the terminals themselves (granted built in a different era) means that passengers wouldn't benefit from any airside train. Given that most people are transferring within terminals 1 or 3, and perhaps 1-2, the distance is quite short. It doesn't need more than that as the only inter terminal transfers that would require a transit system are international-domestic, which by design are already outside security. Why build an extra system. And this is from somebody who's used O'Hare a lot.

Off the top of my head the major airports in the US:

ATL has the internal and one for rental car, but parking is foot or bus
ORD as above
JFK has Airtrain outside security that functions much like ORD
DFW has one, buses for rental
LAX has none
SFO has one that functions much like ORD, outside security
SEA has one behind security, buses to rental
MIA has one internal that doesn't even connect the entire airport and the MIA Mover which doesn't just function to serve rental car
IAH works the way you suggest having an airside and landside connector
DEN has one internal one and shuttles to rentals
DTW -- internal one concourse
MSP -- internal one concourse
IAD -- one poorly functioning internal people mover
EWR -- no rail connecting the terminals
LGA -- zilch
PHL -- nothing


So of the major US hubs, only ATL and IAH function the optimal way you suggest.


Once the terminal modernization is complete and airlines and their partners are together without the need to go out and back in security to do an international to domestic transfer, I agree that there is no need for an airside train or bus system as there are relatively few carrier to carrier transfers outside alliance systems. The street side train is of course still necessary to terminal to parking, terminal to
rental car facilities, and occasional terminal to terminal use cases
 
gwrudolph
Posts: 565
Joined: Sat Sep 13, 2008 3:46 pm

Re: ORD people mover

Tue Mar 09, 2021 9:23 pm

muralir wrote:
gwrudolph wrote:
BEG2IAH wrote:
People Mover is a total joke like many other infrastructure projects in and around Chicago. They are, without exception, overpriced, over budget, delayed, and corruption's ugly head creeps up from all of them.

One thing that's absolutely unacceptable are buckets used for rainwater collection and this happens every single time when it rains. This has been going on for years. Another thing are restrooms with smelly drains and faucets that leak out 2 ml of water per minute. I'm all for conservation, but we are sitting on Michigan Lake...


Yep the City of Chicago does an awful job at maintaining ORD terminals. On the outside, the flashing is all pollution stained from years of neglect. The leaking roofs and stained ceilings are something to be seen, and the bathrooms are disgusting. The elevators in the parking garages are from a horror movie. They just don’t maintain anything properly in that airport.


I agree with you about T1. I remember when it opened it was amazing, with bright sunlight lighting up the whole terminal, wide concourses, and everything. But it's suffered from years of deferred maintenance. Now it just looks drab and dreary, which is quite a feat given that the entire roof is glass that's supposed to let sunlight through. And yeah, the buckets on the floors to collect rainwater is pretty embarrassing. T3 and T5 are better maintained, but part of the problem is all these terminals were designed in the pre-911 era. So besides the maintenance issues, they're just not designed for modern flows.

For example, the amount of retail and lounge space available is inadequate for the new reality where people come to airport much earlier for their flights. So they've stuck a bunch of kiosks on the concourse floors which makes the terminal feel even more cramped. And then you have a mismatch in check-in counters: in T1/2/3 with their largely domestic traffic, there's tons of empty counter space since few people check in luggage anymore. But in T5, which is primarily international, the counter space is always overflowing, because of all the new security screening equipment needed post 9/11.

I don't know if Chicago's politicians understand that for frequent business travelers, issues like ease of transits, lounge space, etc. *does* make a difference in what flights they select. Sure, VFR traffic that flies once a year doesn't really care, but those aren't the high dollar passengers that airlines care about, and that drive airlines to add new service. While ORD will always have a baseline level of connections due to its geographic advantages, it can't attract more service until the passenger experience is improved.

FWIW, while the maintenance of T1 is still a problem, the new terminal construction plan should address most of the rest of the issues. Replacing T2/3 with an integrated terminal for SA and OW, and designating T5 for all SkyTeam airlines will obviate the need for probably 90% of inter-terminal transfers, especially domestic<->international. While T5 won't be rebuilt, increasing its mix of domestic pax (by moving Delta and other carriers there, and moving international SA/OW flights out) will relieve the counterspace crowding in T5, while taking advantage of empty counterspace in the other terminals. Not to mention the horrendous TSA lines at T5 during the afternoon rush will be relieved when most transfers are done airside. Heck, even the people mover becomes a nonissue for connecting passengers if most of the transfers happen airside.

Overall, ORD has really suffered from decades of political gridlock, but in the past 10 years, that has been slowly addressed. IMHO, the hardest part is now complete (the runway configuration). ORD will soon have 8 runways, 6 of which are parallel. No other airport in the world has that capacity. And they did it on-time, on-budget, and without disrupting their massive operations. That could have easily been fubar'ed and set back the airport by another decade. Now that it's largely complete, if the terminal projects stay on track, most of the remaining issues will be resolved.


The terminal modernization will make T1/2/3 beautiful and functional. However, if they continue to ignore basic maintenance and upkeep, it won’t be long before they fall into the same level of disrepair that the once beautiful T1 and T5 have fallen victim to
 
Happytycho
Posts: 30
Joined: Sun Aug 16, 2020 5:10 am

Re: ORD people mover

Tue Mar 09, 2021 9:43 pm

gwrudolph wrote:
luckyone wrote:
ckfred wrote:


Here's the real issue. Most airports have 2 transit systems. One moves people between terminals or concourses. The other connects the terminal(s), with parking and/or rental cars.

ORD's train system tries to do both. So, it has to be outside of security. That makes connections tough.

I'm not sure I follow your logic here. ORD isn't an outlier here. Are the terminals shiny and new? No. But the domestic airsides are all connected to each other. The shape of the terminals themselves (granted built in a different era) means that passengers wouldn't benefit from any airside train. Given that most people are transferring within terminals 1 or 3, and perhaps 1-2, the distance is quite short. It doesn't need more than that as the only inter terminal transfers that would require a transit system are international-domestic, which by design are already outside security. Why build an extra system. And this is from somebody who's used O'Hare a lot.

Off the top of my head the major airports in the US:

ATL has the internal and one for rental car, but parking is foot or bus
ORD as above
JFK has Airtrain outside security that functions much like ORD
DFW has one, buses for rental
LAX has none
SFO has one that functions much like ORD, outside security
SEA has one behind security, buses to rental
MIA has one internal that doesn't even connect the entire airport and the MIA Mover which doesn't just function to serve rental car
IAH works the way you suggest having an airside and landside connector
DEN has one internal one and shuttles to rentals
DTW -- internal one concourse
MSP -- internal one concourse
IAD -- one poorly functioning internal people mover
EWR -- no rail connecting the terminals
LGA -- zilch
PHL -- nothing


So of the major US hubs, only ATL and IAH function the optimal way you suggest.


Once the terminal modernization is complete and airlines and their partners are together without the need to go out and back in security to do an international to domestic transfer, I agree that there is no need for an airside train or bus system as there are relatively few carrier to carrier transfers outside alliance systems. The street side train is of course still necessary to terminal to parking, terminal to
rental car facilities, and occasional terminal to terminal use cases


Even after the modernization, US rules will still require clearing security on an international to domestic transfer.
There won't be a need for an airside connection to T5, but there will be a new unmet need for a people mover to the new T2 satellites, however.
 
gwrudolph
Posts: 565
Joined: Sat Sep 13, 2008 3:46 pm

Re: ORD people mover

Tue Mar 09, 2021 10:07 pm

Happytycho wrote:
gwrudolph wrote:
luckyone wrote:
I'm not sure I follow your logic here. ORD isn't an outlier here. Are the terminals shiny and new? No. But the domestic airsides are all connected to each other. The shape of the terminals themselves (granted built in a different era) means that passengers wouldn't benefit from any airside train. Given that most people are transferring within terminals 1 or 3, and perhaps 1-2, the distance is quite short. It doesn't need more than that as the only inter terminal transfers that would require a transit system are international-domestic, which by design are already outside security. Why build an extra system. And this is from somebody who's used O'Hare a lot.

Off the top of my head the major airports in the US:

ATL has the internal and one for rental car, but parking is foot or bus
ORD as above
JFK has Airtrain outside security that functions much like ORD
DFW has one, buses for rental
LAX has none
SFO has one that functions much like ORD, outside security
SEA has one behind security, buses to rental
MIA has one internal that doesn't even connect the entire airport and the MIA Mover which doesn't just function to serve rental car
IAH works the way you suggest having an airside and landside connector
DEN has one internal one and shuttles to rentals
DTW -- internal one concourse
MSP -- internal one concourse
IAD -- one poorly functioning internal people mover
EWR -- no rail connecting the terminals
LGA -- zilch
PHL -- nothing


So of the major US hubs, only ATL and IAH function the optimal way you suggest.


Once the terminal modernization is complete and airlines and their partners are together without the need to go out and back in security to do an international to domestic transfer, I agree that there is no need for an airside train or bus system as there are relatively few carrier to carrier transfers outside alliance systems. The street side train is of course still necessary to terminal to parking, terminal to
rental car facilities, and occasional terminal to terminal use cases


Even after the modernization, US rules will still require clearing security on an international to domestic transfer.
There won't be a need for an airside connection to T5, but there will be a new unmet need for a people mover to the new T2 satellites, however.


Ah, fair enough. Thanks for the clarification. I guess having lived in Chicago for a long time, I didn’t need to do international to domestic connection so I forgot that was the case.

With the T2 remote satellite concourse will that be a walkway and moving walkway or some type of people mover solution?
 
PhilMcCrackin
Posts: 379
Joined: Mon Jun 24, 2019 11:54 pm

Re: ORD people mover

Tue Mar 09, 2021 10:52 pm

apodino wrote:
luckyone wrote:
ckfred wrote:


Here's the real issue. Most airports have 2 transit systems. One moves people between terminals or concourses. The other connects the terminal(s), with parking and/or rental cars.

ORD's train system tries to do both. So, it has to be outside of security. That makes connections tough.

I'm not sure I follow your logic here. ORD isn't an outlier here. Are the terminals shiny and new? No. But the domestic airsides are all connected to each other. The shape of the terminals themselves (granted built in a different era) means that passengers wouldn't benefit from any airside train. Given that most people are transferring within terminals 1 or 3, and perhaps 1-2, the distance is quite short. It doesn't need more than that as the only inter terminal transfers that would require a transit system are international-domestic, which by design are already outside security. Why build an extra system. And this is from somebody who's used O'Hare a lot.

Off the top of my head the major airports in the US:

ATL has the internal and one for rental car, but parking is foot or bus
ORD as above
JFK has Airtrain outside security that functions much like ORD
DFW has one, buses for rental
LAX has none
SFO has one that functions much like ORD, outside security
SEA has one behind security, buses to rental
MIA has one internal that doesn't even connect the entire airport and the MIA Mover which doesn't just function to serve rental car
IAH works the way you suggest having an airside and landside connector
DEN has one internal one and shuttles to rentals
DTW -- internal one concourse
MSP -- internal one concourse
IAD -- one poorly functioning internal people mover
EWR -- no rail connecting the terminals
LGA -- zilch
PHL -- nothing


So of the major US hubs, only ATL and IAH function the optimal way you suggest.


MSP also has one outside security that goes between the Light rail/rental car facility to the baggage claim-ticket counter landside, so it is also one that functions this way. The light rail itself acts as the shuttle between terminals.

EWR has the airtrain outside security that links the terminals with rental car and the Train Station.

MCO is also going in this direction with the airside trams, and also landside to the new transit center/south terminal.

PHX has one as well that links the terminals landside but the rental car link is still some time away.

TPA also has airside shuttles, dont know about landside.


PHX's rental car center expansion opens early next year. It also connects the parking areas and on to the 44th St station that connects to the metro light rail.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: 11C, arielpeinado, Baidu [Spider], crytexx, Daysleeper, FLJ, freshwater, jplatts, MartijnNL, Mexicana757, MIflyer12, minilinde, MrHMSH, orlandocfi, Pendennis, Rifitto, SRQLOT, ZK-NBT and 202 guests

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

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

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

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

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

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

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

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos