If my employer told me I had to stay three nights, I would tell him that he needed to get a new employee.

We have told you the facts as well, a weekday one night stay costs $1,000. Nowhereman paid the going rate, all your showing is that you take different trips.

I just searched United's website, looking for a flight from Houston 21 days from now, with a 2 night stay. I found a flight (round trip) in the $700's range.

Nowhereman, you're getting hosed

Well comparing Tom In Chicago to Nowhereman, it just looks like the "Saturday night stay" rule is making Tom's fare cheaper and Nowhereman's expensive.

But there's also booking classes (refundability, etc.). Nowhereman, what booking class are you being given for your fare? The order (this assumes economy class), from most expensive to least expensive, is roughly:
Y (fully refundable), B; M, E, U; H, Q; V, W, G; S, T, K, L.
So, your travel agent might be getting you a slightly more expensive booking class so that you can avoid certain penalties/fees for cancellations and changes. Not too uncommon for business travel. Enjoy the frequent flyer miles (you can get a higher multiple with the highest booking classes).

Just an fyi: I dont always use the travel agent. I actually explicitly said ive done it myself and tried the agent and gotten the same results. The facts are that you can't fly like I do to Houston unless you are willing to pay out the ass. I usually am not able to book three weeks in advance like i did this time and usually have two weeks notice max. I' ve gotten tickets for less before, but it depends on how high the demand to fly to Houston is during any given week. Ive seen prices at $1000 one month in advance before because some convention or something was going on so it is not as if there is some rule that says prices are $x three weeks in advance.

Also, for the record, I didnt use the travel agent this time and bought them off UALs website. Additionally prices can vary depending on what day you are booking them. For example, the most special fares show up on tuesdays for some reason so if you buy then you are more likely to get a discount rate. Airline fares are a voodo science at best, but the point is that UAL charges way too fucking much to go to Houston. Even at $600 they are charging way too much when I can get tickets to Denver or LA for about half that.

Southwest? Sure it's different airports both here and there, but with cab cost included, you should still be way cheaper than United, not to mention the free bag check.

SATCT - 219 feet tall

http://img209.imageshack.us/img209/4063/satct1.jpg
http://img840.imageshack.us/img840/6117/satct2.jpg

^ http://www.exp.com/en/projectsviewer...&projectid=934

:tup: Looking good! These are the same folks that designed the people mover system (soon to also be rehabbed/expanded)

^^ I can't tell; is it short or is it wide?

That tower really is big. The second picture makes it look like the view from Willis Tower.

^ Renders are usually exaggerated in non-material aspects, like having an unrealistically large number of people who are unrealistically happy, handsome, and well-dressed and engaged in unrealistically productive activities. Ever see a grumpy fat guy smoking in a building render? Here, someone took some liberties with the background landscape.

Per Emporis (sorry ex-Emporis guys!), ORD's existing towers are 255ft and 260ft, so this is much smaller. In the US, "quite tall" would be something approaching 400ft (recently built at ATL).

The glass escape stair seems not very tornado-ready. At all. I think I would want my ATC folks to feel safe & comfortable, when tornadoes loom.

Just give them some parachutes.

I've done rain and snow renderings. It's also fairly common for designers to slip themselves and/or friends, celebrities, war criminals, etc into rendering backgrounds.

O'Hare Modernization Program Reaches Milestone With Railroad Track Relocation
May 11, 2012 05:00 PM

The O'Hare Modernization Program (OMP) earlier this week accomplished a significant achievement with the completion of a railroad relocation, airport officials said in a statement. Union Pacific Rail Road (UPRR) crews completed the tie-in points between the recently OMP-constructed railroad realignment and the existing UPRR tracks...

http://www.aviationnews.net/?do=headline&news_ID=205339

^ Thanks Kippis, I think I would not have found that source on my own...
(Now if any railfan can come up with the same story in a rail industry journal, that would be perfect.)

Hard to believe but it's been less than a year since Da Mare was last walking the Fifth Floor. And just 14 months ago, Crain's and others reported on a "Daley Compromise" with airlines about what is included in the current phase of OMP. The airfield layout was to look like this -- with only 1 OMP runway deferred to later:

http://img833.imageshack.us/img833/9475/compromise.jpg

This image and the articles are referenced in a discussion on 3/14/2011 on page 51 of this thread.

My question is, at present is the Far South Runway (10R/28L) more or less a done deal, completely in limbo, or something in between? I think the local media may have been reporting controversy over it this week.

I just noticed from the latest Google satellite imagery that the buildings near the flag poles are missing. The flag poles are at the entrance of the driveway to the parking garage. I thought one of these buildings was a firehouse or some other management building. Anyone know what these buildings were used for and what happened to them?

At first I had no idea what flags you are talking about, but fortunately the sun was low when the satellite photo Google uses was taken so it was easy to find a long row of many gigantic flags (at least their shadows). It's just a couple dozen yards outbound of the main cashier booths for the main garage, right? Looking at the same area on Bing's satellite photos, the only buildings that were there looked like temporary sheds or trailers. Maybe they were temporary offices for the construction company doing the giant departure level awning project, or something? Also, from the photos you can see there is a driveway leading to an underground part of the area you identified, so who knows what all is down there anyway.

Regardless, there is lots of delicious LAND available in those surface lots, upon which new terminals or facilities will hopefully be built.

,,

It's a done deal. Runway 10R/28L was a key component in the Daley compromise. I haven't seen anything official that says exactly when construction of 10R/28L will begin in earnest, but it'll probably be sometime in 2013. Runway 10C/28C (the second new runway) is scheduled to complete late 2013.

What's happening presently is that Rahm has decided to move up negotiations on the construction of a new 4th runway (9C/27C), and the extension of 9R/27R. These discussions, agreed upon as part of the compromise, were planned to begin in 2013. The major O'Hare airline tenants, United and American, are not particularly pleased with the accelerated schedule, hence the news stories.

My thoughts exactly. I was doodling around a potential concourse A that would hold regional aircraft for United, which would occupy the surface lot. An underground tunnel can connect B to A. If the tunnel is placed correctly, you could have a shorter access time from the curb to the RJ's, assuming that most folks aren't checking in luggage for the RJ's. This would immediately remove many of the RJs at concourse F, but not all. The biggest problem would be an A to F connection, as that would be the longest distance to traverse. In the end, United still needs gates in F, although it could release gates in E if A were built. If that happened, other airlines could jump in, which would increase competition, which is what United doesn't want.

The access road would need to be sunk 15 - 20 feet to allow taxiway access across, which would be a major cost.

http://jenner1a.tripod.com/webonmedi...?1337055853497

Additionally, this would impair the possibility of expanding the garage on the west side, since Concourse A would stand in its way.

BTW, did United and American pay for the changes in concourses F and G to have basement level seating and boarding?

http://www.journal-topics.com/news/a...9bb30f31a.html

Extension Of Second Entrance To O'Hare Through Rosemont Moves Forward
By TODD WESSELL Wednesday, May 16, 2012

By the end of 2013, a second roadway will likely be in operation that will allow motorists to drive into and out of O’Hare Airport.

...Plans call for Balmoral to extend over Mannheim Road in an S-curve design and link with Bessie Coleman Drive to the west. An exit for southbound traffic onto Balmoral will be built at Mannheim.

The project also includes the widening of Mannheim Road from Irving Park Road on the south to a point north of Higgins Road to the north.

Interesting photo taken from the Bensenville railroad yard looking north in June 1943. This land looking north is now O'hare airport. They had at this point already built a airport called Douglas Field next to the Douglas C54/DC4 plant. I think to the right you can see the industrial complex off in the distance. This photo came from the National Archives and is from Kodak Kodachrome large format color film.




http://i225.photobucket.com/albums/d...aa1a34810u.jpg

Interesting. I was just annoyed the other day at how stupidly the Rosemont Blue Line station is designed. It should really have a much stronger pedestrian connection to the hotel/entertainment area, but it has no southern entrance and there's a huge interchange to the south with minimal sidewalks.

Maybe if some traffic can be shifted to Balmoral instead of 190, they can rebuild this interchange in a more compact form and open up more land for development, using the proceeds to fund a new southern entrance to the station and wide sidewalks with proper crosswalks.

Well, is that Blue Line will extend service from O'Hare to Rosemont station? When they will starting?

What on earth did you just say? Can anyone translate? Ive tried a few times but it still doesn't make sense to me. Does he think that the Blue Line doesnt service Rosemont?

Not from the area, I'd say. But yeah, I think he's asking if the Blue Line services both O'Hare and Rosemont along the same route. To end the suspense: yes, yes it does.

Forgot who had to argue this would not happen, but I thought I should post this. O'hare will be the biggest United hub under the merger.


////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////

"Houston was thrust into the middle of a battle between United Airlines and Southwest Airlines after the city approved a proposal by Southwest to build a five-gate extension for international flights from William P. Hobby Airport.

The city’s 16-1 vote last month angered United, which has a major hub 30 miles north of Hobby, at George Bush Intercontinental Airport. It argued that its own international business would be hurt by the international gates at Hobby.

Shortly after the vote, United, which is based in Chicago, said that it would cut 1,300 jobs at Bush airport and that its plans for a $700 million expansion at Bush, Houston’s biggest airport, were now “in significant doubt.”

“Unfortunately, the city of Houston will suffer the consequences of this decision for decades to come,” Jeff Smisek, United’s chief executive, said at the time. "


http://www.nytimes.com/2012/06/15/bu...pagewanted=all

^ A little surprised about that seemingly spiteful response. There must be a lot of history in the Continental-Houston relationship though, perhaps some of it rocky.

For me, the bigger takeaway from that article is another example of the New York Times giving short shrift to Chicago. It describes a host of multi-billion-dollar airport projects around the country -- and ignores O'Hare's OMP, which overall is bigger than all the others. There is only passing mention of Chicago. Yes, some of OMP's work includes the Bypass and cargo facilities, which are perhaps outside of the scope being discussed in the article, but OMP does have plenty of runway and taxiway work, including work for accommodating the newest jumbo jets, which are definitely covered in the article. The only other explanation would be wanting to provide cover for Obama, because widespread awareness of this massive investment in Chicago might give an impression he is favoring his home city. I kind of doubt that's the case here though. There would have been a natural lead-in to O'Hare discussion after the Smisek remarks, but they blew it off.

Maybe we are just better off flying under the radar of public perception, as far federal funding to local projects goes?

You noticed that..The NY media always downplays anything in Chicago, unless it is negative like southside shootings. They must be worried about something:)

As far as United, I am not sure what type of flight increases they are planning for ORD next year, but with AA in Bankruptcy this might be their big chance to do some damage in Chicago wich would be a very bad thing in the long run. I don't think they will pull down Houston to much more or they risk giving AA more of Texass(along with Southwest, although SW has no long range international service).

Who cares? Nothing is being cut at IAH by UA that they hadn't planned on doing anyway. It's good that Houston doesn't feel the need to suck up to UA the same way Atlanta does to DL or any other city does to an airline that dominates their airport.

Right, it will not going away for a very long time. UA is here to stay and UA isn't leaving from Houston. They don't have worry about WN.

The cities that got the full-length shrift were mainly those with substantial terminal projects, of which Chicago has none.

With the exception of the insanely beautiful (and insanely expensive) Helmut Jahn-designed canopy/curbside project, all of Chicago's work is on the airfield and travelers will never experience it except in the form of reduced delays and more daily flights.

I agree with that 100% on Houston. UA can't afford to pull down anymore and they will be back. I think the UA/AA should also pay more attention to Southwest.

Though, the article wasn't limited to consumer-facing developments - it enumerates some of the projects at Philadelphia, all of which were mere runway projects. Also, Chicago does indeed have projects with semi-direct traveler impact - the airfield improvements will enable the newest jumbo jets to use ORD (at least the 747-8; last I read the A380 would still need taxiway upgrades in addition to the obvious gate construction, but maybe those have in fact been added by now), and the forthcoming consolidated car rental facility is typologically close enough to being an airport project that some of the other listed cities' overall project costs probably include on-site airport-affiliated garages. Anyway by many measures (particularly airport capacity) Chicago is No 2 in the country so to omit discussion of it in an article like this stands out a bit too much.
I'm delighted that we could have a 4th parallel runway 18 months from now (I hope there is no more fuss with the 2 cemeteries - is there even anyone living today who ever knew any of the people interred there? In the same era that those people died, the 19th Century I believe, various European cities were un-burying graves after just 5 or 10 years due to cemetery crowding and moving the remains, so I hope this doesn't categorically offend anybody.) and a 5th parallel runway in just a couple years. I wonder what prompted Rahm to bring forward the talks? Maybe AA's situation had something to do with it. Maybe he just likes doing stuff early. Or maybe he wants to get things moving while LaHood and Obama are certain to still be office (random thought).

Looks like the promised 10% capacity cut on IAH is starting to be loaded into the schedules, to the benefit of ORD and DEN. I believe this now makes ORD the largest hub.

Change in number of flights for this fall:
IAH -17
DEN +12
ORD +8

^
When do these changes go into effect. For summer 2012=IAH:649, ORD=642. So if it is a change from these numbers, that would indeed make ORD the largest hub by number of flights. And what about EWR which currently has four more flilghts then DEN, will they see any change or will DEN become the third largest ORD hub.

The changes I listed go into effect mostly in October and November. So yes, they would not be incorporated into your Sumer 2012 numbers. EWR saw little change.

I'm getting my information from this topic:
http://www.airliners.net/aviation-fo....main/5492754/

United giving Chicago some more love:
http://ir.unitedcontinentalholdings....262&highlight=

New service to Monterrey, Thunder Bay, Nassau, Jackson, and Anchorage. Good to see the airline growing.

Also, they cut another 30 daily flights this week from Houston, so Chicago will undoubtedly be the largest hub.

Airberlin just announced new service to Chicago from Berlin. First time any airline has flown this route, according to the press release at least.

http://www.airberlin.com/en-DE/site/...dr.php?ID=4601

Direct Berlin/Chicago flights will be real nice!

Hainan Airlines has announced 4x weekly service between Beijing and Chicago with 787s starting next year. This could be interesting as both United and American already fly the route daily, so that is a lot of capacity. This will be Hainans second US destination, the other being Seattle.

http://online.wsj.com/article/BT-CO-...18-718303.html

^ The article (and a similar article in USA Today) indicates that this route could be inaugurated with aircraft comparable to 787 if Chinese regulators require additional domestic proving by Hainan of the 787 before permitting them on the international routes. Apparently, according to WSJ, "Chinese regulators have in the past taken time before authorizing new aircraft types on long-haul routes, requiring its carriers to have extensive proving runs on domestic flights. China Southern has been flying its huge Airbus A380s on domestic services for a year." (Who knew Chinese regulators were concerned about anything occurring beyond their borders. Maybe they are genuinely now embracing a role of leadership and integration with the world economy and its norms as opposed to just exporting into it. It will be an interesting adolescence to watch mature.)

I also must remind that Delta headquarters is in Atlanta, so obviously there will be noticeably favoritism and not sucking up. The only reason Houston is not showing favoritism to Chicago based United is because of the loss of its Continental Headquarters .

New T5 concessions
http://img440.imageshack.us/img440/3...4756889620.jpg
Epstein/ Facebook

This is LONG overdue. The T5 concessions are pitiful, cramped, and bunched up around the security lines. Hopefully they can take over some of the space from one of the air lounges to expand.

I like the design screen-printed onto the glass panels up above, too - it screens that balcony and provides a slick modern backdrop without interrupting Perkins+Will's original design. I wonder if Gensler anticipates that design changing over time?

I spy an 'M' Burger. I'm excited - since my last trip its a new Chicago tradition for me!

^ Amen to both of the last two comments.

===============

And here finally is a long-awaited reveal:


http://www.chicagotribune.com/busine...,7051935.story

United to try out 787 on Chicago-Houston flights

... United Continental Holdings, parent of United Airlines, will announce Thursday that it will begin a number of domestic 787 flights before putting those planes on international routes. It will include temporary flights between Chicago O'Hare and Houston's George Bush Intercontinental Airport. ...

The first 787 Chicago flights to Houston will begin Nov. 4 and end Dec. 3. That service will operate six days a week during that time, with the Chicago flight departing at 11:15 a.m. After that, daily service will restart Jan. 4 and run to March 29. ...

The 787s will initially be based in Houston and operate between Houston and United's domestic hubs: San Francisco, Los Angeles, Newark, Cleveland, Denver and Dulles near Washington, D.C. ...

Wow! Finally! Just about time! Looking good! Can't wait to give a try.

O'Hare E-letter.......

Maybe once the ATS extension is done Metra can buy a few DMUs and do an express service out of Union operating every 15 minutes or so. Seems a little more cost effective than CTA spending hundreds of millions to do it.