ORD Terminal Train To Be Extended To Remote Lot

jcwr56 · Fri Oct 26, 2012 4:28 pm

While no formal press release that I know of has been issued, this will help in moving folks around ORD. The 15 additional cars could be used today. Especially from T5 to the domestic core during peak times.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/49568038/ns/local_news-chicago_il/

It's to be extended 2000' to remote lot F where a new 5 story consolidated car rental facility will be constructed and tie in with the commuter rail service.

Now if we can only get the TSA and the city to work towards converting the ATS to be sterile, connecting at ORD would be a breeze. (can anyone say remote checkin, baggage service and TSA checkpoint before getting on)

United787 · Fri Oct 26, 2012 5:37 pm

Fantastic news... always made me scratch my head that the ATS flies right over the current location car rental companies without stopping. Also, great the Metra will be connected, kind of.

Even though I will never rent a car at ORD since I live here, this will reduce traffic near the terminals.

Now, if they could only extend into a full loop - north to some hotels and the Allstate Arena - east to the The Rivers Casino and more hotels - south to the Rosemont CTA stop, more hotels, the Donald E. Stevens Convention Center, the Theater and then - west to the Rosemont Metra stop and back to Terminal 5 - it would be quite amazing... of course it should be paid for by the fine crooks of Rosemont since they would benefit from it the most...

United787 · Fri Oct 26, 2012 5:39 pm

What will happen with the area where the current car rental companies are located? I assume it will become long term parking...they will need another ATS stop there...

Another article of the same:

http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2...r-rental-companies-rental-facility

[Edited 2012-10-26 10:45:27]

FWAERJ · Fri Oct 26, 2012 6:22 pm

Not surprised at all. Other airports have been moving to consolidated rental car facilities.

That said, will the old car rental lots next to Remote Lot E be converted into more parking spaces?

777ord · Fri Oct 26, 2012 7:42 pm

that is GREAT NEWS!!!! I'm sure the ones who drive the Hertz and other company buses may not like it. BUT, it will certainly help congestion and save time!!

scutfarcus · Fri Oct 26, 2012 9:18 pm

Good call. Now sure how connected the Metra really will be, but would make it a lot easier if you could get off and hop on that train!

Cubsrule · Fri Oct 26, 2012 9:27 pm

Quoting FWAERJ (Reply 3):
That said, will the old car rental lots next to Remote Lot E be converted into more parking spaces?

Presumably. I don't know what else that space could or would be used for. If so, I suspect all parking will now be connected to ATS.

Quoting scutfarcus (Reply 5):
Now sure how connected the Metra really will be, but would make it a lot easier if you could get off and hop on that train!

Yes, although the suggestion in the Tribune article of taking Metra to the ATS to the Blue Line to get downtown is just silly.

Quoting FWAERJ (Reply 3):
Other airports have been moving to consolidated rental car facilities.

Yes, although this facility is going to have the same problem as the new ATL consolidated facility: it's a very long process to get to the facility and rent a car, and those needing to get on the interstate won't have a real easy way to do so (driving down Manheim will likely be the quickest).

The better solution would have been drastically enlarging the hourly garage so that there was room in there for rental cars.

pu · Fri Oct 26, 2012 10:05 pm

I used to use Chicago as a base for long business trips I had to take through America and I am accustom to using the most economical official (airport managed) parking option. So I used to do the train/bus routine. I once came back to ORD on a late flight and my borrowed car was under half a foot of snow and it was still snowing!

I tried for about 2 minutes to unbury myself using a laptop bag as a snow brush....but decided a night at the Airport Hilton bar and passing out in an Airport Hilton room would probably fit in somewhere unnoticed on my expense report. A very fun time! Lots of interesting people at that particular bar on a snowy night...

(Ok, not really related to extending the train, but a good memory about O'hare)

Pu

roseflyer · Fri Oct 26, 2012 10:26 pm

Quoting jcwr56 (Thread starter):

Now if we can only get the TSA and the city to work towards converting the ATS to be sterile, connecting at ORD would be a breeze. (can anyone say remote checkin, baggage service and TSA checkpoint before getting on)

Terminal 1, 2 and 3 are all connected on the sterile side. International departures for the US airlines are already out of Terminals 1, 2 and 3. The only benefit making the train sterile would be for people connecting from US domestic flights to foreign carriers. People often already have to check in again at T5, so the number is relatively small. People arriving on international flights need to go through security again, so there's no benefit for the train being sterile for them. In fact it might be worse because if they have to recheck for their domestic flight and not all US airlines have a desk in T5 to check in at.

I don't see the train being moved to the sterile side. You'd still need one outside of security.

777ord · Sat Oct 27, 2012 11:08 am

Quoting Roseflyer (Reply 8):
Quoting jcwr56 (Thread starter):

Now if we can only get the TSA and the city to work towards converting the ATS to be sterile, connecting at ORD would be a breeze. (can anyone say remote checkin, baggage service and TSA checkpoint before getting on)

Terminal 1, 2 and 3 are all connected on the sterile side. International departures for the US airlines are already out of Terminals 1, 2 and 3. The only benefit making the train sterile would be for people connecting from US domestic flights to foreign carriers. People often already have to check in again at T5, so the number is relatively small. People arriving on international flights need to go through security again, so there's no benefit for the train being sterile for them. In fact it might be worse because if they have to recheck for their domestic flight and not all US airlines have a desk in T5 to check in at.

I don't see the train being moved to the sterile side. You'd still need one outside of security.

Perhaps there is a plan (FINGERS CROSSED!!) to create some sort of tunnel/people mover from T3 or some other general area within the terminals, to T5. Would certainly allow for those arriving from OCONUS to whichever airline at T1-3, a more convienent method of transport. When the Asia and Europe rushes occur at T-5, and they all are connecting to a domestic segment.. WOW! Is that people mover insane.

Oh, maybe... JUST maybe ORD will become efficient for intl connections.

jcwr56 · Sat Oct 27, 2012 12:25 pm

Quoting 777ord (Reply 9):
Perhaps there is a plan (FINGERS CROSSED!!) to create some sort of tunnel/people mover from T3 or some other general area within the terminals, to T5. Would certainly allow for those arriving from OCONUS to whichever airline at T1-3, a more convenient method of transport. When the Asia and Europe rushes occur at T-5, and they all are connecting to a domestic segment.. WOW! Is that people mover insane.

Oh, maybe... JUST maybe ORD will become efficient for intl connections.

This is why I mentioned it, ORD is a major connecting city for International flights and having the ability not to re-screen would shave off 30 minutes. The work-group was tasked to look at ALL options and this was one of them. As for recheck counters at T5, AA, UA have their own set on each side and then there's the common use ones which any airline can use when they have a flight.

After the scathing article about CPB wait times in the UK press regarding Chicago, downtown took notice.

ORDJOE · Sat Oct 27, 2012 5:41 pm

While all this might sound all well and good, this just seems like a waste of money. I use that lot whenever I am paying for my own parking, and i only have to wait a few mi ties most for the bus to that team. As forthe rental cars, I will never rent from them as I will never need to, but it seems to me there is a frequent shuttle to the rental lots.

Over all this will cost a lot of money, and guess who will pay for this, bingo the people who go through ORD through PFCs and higher car rental costs ( Chicago already has one of the highest, if not the highest tax burden for travel products and services.)
I like my $9 a day parking, I do not mind waiting a few minutes for a bus. I just don't think this is the wisest use of money.
As for connecting after security, you can walk from T3 to T1 in 10 minutes. I know there is a bus from K15 to One of the M gates in T5 for BA pax, let's look into a cheap shuttle to connect to T5 before dropping a 100 million plus on another airport monorail.

apodino · Sun Oct 28, 2012 4:17 am

I think the title is a bit misleading. The Monorail already extends to a remote parking lot, which doubles as a Kiss and Fly area and a CTA Bus Stop. The bigger news is the Monorail being extended into a Consolidated Rental Car facility, which is really good as it will alleviate congestion caused by all the courtesy buses at curbside. Now if only BOS could learn about the benefits of a people mover.

Quoting Cubsrule (Reply 6):

Yes, although this facility is going to have the same problem as the new ATL consolidated facility: it's a very long process to get to the facility and rent a car, and those needing to get on the interstate won't have a real easy way to do so (driving down Manheim will likely be the quickest).

Try the CLE facility. They located it in what looks like a run down industrial area. In fact to get from Route 90 to that facility, you have to know the way because there is no signage at all leading from Route 90 to the airport, and only one small sign leading to the Rental Car facility.

Quoting jcwr56 (Thread starter):

Now if we can only get the TSA and the city to work towards converting the ATS to be sterile, connecting at ORD would be a breeze. (can anyone say remote checkin, baggage service and TSA checkpoint before getting on)

As people have mentioned, this would really gain nothing for people. All the Star Alliance airlines that people make connections to already use T1 for Departures. IB uses T3, and I believe someone mentioned a shuttle from T3 to T5, which allows AA pax to connect to both BA and JL flights. For most of the other international airlines out of ORD, they are almost all O & D, so there is going to be very few pax connecting in ORD. T1,2, and 3 are all already linked on the secure side as it is.

DTW was looking at doing something similar between the North Terminal and the McNamara Terminal, but NW was opposed to it prior to the merger, and how many people besides non airline commuters actually do a connection like that in DTW?

bohica · Sun Oct 28, 2012 5:20 am

Quoting jcwr56 (Thread starter):
new 5 story consolidated car rental facility will be constructed and tie in with the commuter rail service.

Metra trains only stop there 10 times inbound and 11 times outbound according to their schedule. Most of the trains operate during rush hour only. It also doesn't operate weekends or holidays. You're better off taking the El.

Quoting Cubsrule (Reply 6):
The better solution would have been drastically enlarging the hourly garage so that there was room in there for rental cars.

That makes too much sense.

jcwr56 · Sun Oct 28, 2012 11:23 am

Quoting jcwr56 (Thread starter):
As people have mentioned, this would really gain nothing for people. All the Star Alliance airlines that people make connections to already use T1 for Departures. IB uses T3, and I believe someone mentioned a shuttle from T3 to T5, which allows AA pax to connect to both BA and JL flights. For most of the other international airlines out of ORD, they are almost all O & D, so there is going to be very few pax connecting in ORD. T1,2, and 3 are all already linked on the secure side as it is.

I'll disagree. I'll sit down and pull data to see the percentage of O & D to connecting traffic both ways. I know this was discussed at the our last working group.

We have OZ, LO, SK, TK, LX and soon to be OS for Star out of T5. LO would have the most O&D but these other carriers have plenty of connections. I'll add EI to Star because of code share and they depart from T5.

BA, RJ, EY, CX and soon to be AB, QR and HU for One World out of T5. BA runs a specific shuttle for connecting passengers from T3 to T5 for only F and J BA passengers.

AM, AF, KE, DL (winter season to CDG) for Sky Team out of T5. Granted the weakness of the 3 for connections, but the fact is people do connect.

The airlines and city are looking options to make ORD more streamlined when it comes to connecting and this was one suggestion.

Generally, there won't be a new Terminal built or multiple FIS facilities at ORD for some time.

bcoz · Sun Oct 28, 2012 5:28 pm

Quoting Cubsrule (Reply 6):
Yes, although the suggestion in the Tribune article of taking Metra to the ATS to the Blue Line to get downtown is just silly.

Agreed. The Metra North Central Service line that stops at O'Hare Transfer is one of Metra's lines with the least service. Schedules are completely rush hour-based (i.e. very, very few trains outbound in the morning and inbound in the evening). In addition, there is no service on the weekends... as that is part of Metra's agreement with CN, which owns the tracks. I don't see that changing anytime soon. It's a shame, because I think it would be used not only by those going to/from downtown, but also by folks from the suburbs using Union Station or Ogilvie as a connection point (In particular on long trips when your long term parking bill might be rather large).

Quoting apodino (Reply 12):
Try the CLE facility. They located it in what looks like a run down industrial area. In fact to get from Route 90 to that facility, you have to know the way because there is no signage at all leading from Route 90 to the airport, and only one small sign leading to the Rental Car facility.

Maybe it is because my family is originally from Northeast Ohio and I've been flying out of CLE for the past 25 years, but I think that facility is one of the easier to access. It is very convenient to both 480 and 71.

bcoz

chicawgo · Tue Oct 30, 2012 7:57 pm

Quoting ordjoe (Reply 11):
While all this might sound all well and good, this just seems like a waste of money. I use that lot whenever I am paying for my own parking, and i only have to wait a few mi ties most for the bus to that team. As forthe rental cars, I will never rent from them as I will never need to, but it seems to me there is a frequent shuttle to the rental lots.

Over all this will cost a lot of money, and guess who will pay for this, bingo the people who go through ORD through PFCs and higher car rental costs ( Chicago already has one of the highest, if not the highest tax burden for travel products and services.)
I like my $9 a day parking, I do not mind waiting a few minutes for a bus. I just don't think this is the wisest use of money.
As for connecting after security, you can walk from T3 to T1 in 10 minutes. I know there is a bus from K15 to One of the M gates in T5 for BA pax, let's look into a cheap shuttle to connect to T5 before dropping a 100 million plus on another airport monorail.

I think you're mistaken here... As others have posted, the main reason for this extension is to connect it to the rental car facility.... not to connect to the far economy lots. There will no doubt be new economy lots that will open up that will still have shuttles take you to the ATS station.

This extension is extremely helpful for customers renting cars. Many other airports are installing these (SFO, ATL, etc...). ORD is the 2nd busiest airport... we should be competitive and have the most efficient option. Dragging luggage onto those buses and then all the stop and go is a huge hassle. Having a reliable, efficient, and accessible ATS solutions is the best option here. Also, it will cut down on a lot of traffic. I've seen those buses sitting in traffic on 190 during rush periods and this will eliminate that with the added benefit of reduced emissions.

r2rho · Wed Oct 31, 2012 2:12 pm

Nice idea... ifff the Metra is efficiently linked up as well (I mean a real transfer connection, not another one of those stations within a so-called "reasonable" walk). Otherwise it misses an opportunity.

Quoting bohica (Reply 13):
Metra trains only stop there 10 times inbound and 11 times outbound according to their schedule. Most of the trains operate during rush hour only. It also doesn't operate weekends or holidays. You're better off taking the El.

That is the current status quo. But IMO (if there is a real transfer connection) this creates a new alternative for getting to/from ORD, that could justify adding some additional Metra services over time.

Quoting Roseflyer (Reply 8):
The only benefit making the train sterile would be for people connecting from US domestic flights to foreign carriers. People often already have to check in again at T5, so the number is relatively small. People arriving on international flights need to go through security again, so there's no benefit for the train being sterile for them. In fact it might be worse because if they have to recheck for their domestic flight and not all US airlines have a desk in T5 to check in at.

I don't see the train being moved to the sterile side. You'd still need one outside of security.

Or you can think out of the box and do like FRA, and have a people mover that serves both landside and airside with the same train. No need to be running separate train lines if the passenger flows and corresponding train cars are separated.
And I do think that an airside link to T5 would help ease connections, and that more people than you think would use it and benefit from it.

Cubsrule · Wed Oct 31, 2012 2:14 pm

Quoting r2rho (Reply 17):
But IMO (if there is a real transfer connection) this creates a new alternative for getting to/from ORD, that could justify adding some additional Metra services over time.

Why? By the time one screws around with the ATS - even if it's a seamless connection to Metra - the Blue Line will still be faster and the Blue Line is also better located downtown (and more convenient for transfers to other CTA lines if necessary).

ckfred · Wed Oct 31, 2012 2:26 pm

The only problem with having a central rental car facility connected to the ATS is for those who check luggage. Having to either go up two levels or wait for an elevator to the skybridge, and then down to the train level is a hassle. (I know this from using remote parking at ORD).

A lot of airports with a central parking facility either uses buses which pick up passengers at the baggage claim level and drop them off at the ticketing level, or you have airports like ATL in which the baggage claim and ticketing are on the same level.

So, traffic going in and out of the terminal complex will improve with the elimination of the rental car buses, but the ATS is going to become more crowded. My guess is that the system will require longer trains, run more frequently.

United787 · Wed Oct 31, 2012 2:38 pm

Quoting chicawgo (Reply 16):
This extension is extremely helpful for customers renting cars. Many other airports are installing these (SFO, ATL, etc...). ORD is the 2nd busiest airport... we should be competitive and have the most efficient option. Dragging luggage onto those buses and then all the stop and go is a huge hassle. Having a reliable, efficient, and accessible ATS solutions is the best option here. Also, it will cut down on a lot of traffic. I've seen those buses sitting in traffic on 190 during rush periods and this will eliminate that with the added benefit of reduced emissions.

Amen... the car rental buses clog the arrivals road and IMHO create difficult visability issues when driving...they need to go.

r2rho · Wed Oct 31, 2012 3:09 pm

Quoting Cubsrule (Reply 18):
Blue Line will still be faster and the Blue Line is also better located downtown (and more convenient for transfers to other CTA lines if necessary).

I have assumed that Metra would be faster than the blue line with its many stops, but maybe I'm mistaken? In any case I see this as a long term project. And yes, I agree that Metra to other-CTA transfers need to be improved.

[Edited 2012-10-31 08:11:16]

Cubsrule · Wed Oct 31, 2012 3:13 pm

Quoting r2rho (Reply 21):
I have assumed that Metra would be faster than the blue line with its many stops, but maybe I'm mistaken?

No trains run nonstop from ORD to Union Station so it's difficult to be precise, but it appears to me that a nonstop Metra service would take between 25 and 30 minutes; they are blocked between 35 and 40 minutes with about 5 stops now. The Blue Line is about 45, but the trains are more frequent and it's accessible from the terminal core.

Quoting r2rho (Reply 21):
And yes, I agree that Metra to CTA transfers need to be improved in general.

The renovations to the Green Line station at Clinton and Lake have made transfers from the Northwestern station to the Green Line much more pleasant.

chicawgo · Wed Oct 31, 2012 4:30 pm

Quoting ckfred (Reply 19):
The only problem with having a central rental car facility connected to the ATS is for those who check luggage. Having to either go up two levels or wait for an elevator to the skybridge, and then down to the train level is a hassle. (I know this from using remote parking at ORD).

For T1 you are correct.... it's still a pain to get to the ATS. However, since T2 and T3 Facade project finished a few years ago... it is a breeze to get to ATS from either level. There are multiple sets of large elevators and I believe 2 of them go to ATS. Let's hope that a similar update to T1 and other accessibility improvements to the ATS will be included in the upgrade.

Quoting ckfred (Reply 19):
So, traffic going in and out of the terminal complex will improve with the elimination of the rental car buses, but the ATS is going to become more crowded. My guess is that the system will require longer trains, run more frequently.

Your guess is stated as fact in the article. As part of the ATS upgrade, they will be ordering 15 more cars. The current stations only allow for 3 cars per train. However, with at least 5 more trains, they should be able to have them run every 1-2 minutes I would imagine. As it is now, they have some trains with 2 cars and some with 3 so they can have them run more often. However, they still are only at 4-5 minutes during peak. With the rental car facility they will need it quicker than that.

Quoting r2rho (Reply 17):
And I do think that an airside link to T5 would help ease connections, and that more people than you think would use it and benefit from it.

As was mentioned before, arriving in the USA from int'l flight you must leave airside and re-screen again. Therefore the only people that would use an airside ATS connecting T5 would be from domestic terminal to T5. No one would be able to take it the other way. I don't think building an entire airside system just for the one way would be reasonable.

ORD Terminal Train To Be Extended To Remote Lot

ORD Terminal Train To Be Extended To Remote Lot

RE: ORD Terminal Train To Be Extended To Remote Lot

RE: ORD Terminal Train To Be Extended To Remote Lot

RE: ORD Terminal Train To Be Extended To Remote Lot

RE: ORD Terminal Train To Be Extended To Remote Lot

RE: ORD Terminal Train To Be Extended To Remote Lot

RE: ORD Terminal Train To Be Extended To Remote Lot

RE: ORD Terminal Train To Be Extended To Remote Lot

RE: ORD Terminal Train To Be Extended To Remote Lot

RE: ORD Terminal Train To Be Extended To Remote Lot

RE: ORD Terminal Train To Be Extended To Remote Lot

RE: ORD Terminal Train To Be Extended To Remote Lot

RE: ORD Terminal Train To Be Extended To Remote Lot

RE: ORD Terminal Train To Be Extended To Remote Lot

RE: ORD Terminal Train To Be Extended To Remote Lot

RE: ORD Terminal Train To Be Extended To Remote Lot

RE: ORD Terminal Train To Be Extended To Remote Lot

RE: ORD Terminal Train To Be Extended To Remote Lot

RE: ORD Terminal Train To Be Extended To Remote Lot

RE: ORD Terminal Train To Be Extended To Remote Lot

RE: ORD Terminal Train To Be Extended To Remote Lot

RE: ORD Terminal Train To Be Extended To Remote Lot

RE: ORD Terminal Train To Be Extended To Remote Lot

RE: ORD Terminal Train To Be Extended To Remote Lot

Who is online

Popular Searches On Airliners.net