I am curious how you think aircraft movements is more important to driving economic growth in a city? I would like to understand. Everything I have read over the last ten years has talked about how the number of people drives much more economic impact to a city than aircraft movement with how the passengers spend money and how they bring intellectual property to local companies that helps them grow to lead to job stimulation. It is a tricky data point as some passengers are only in transit.

Passenger data does show that since 1994, ORD (+11%) has not grown compared to the rivals of LAX (+47%), DFW (+55%), ATL (+93%), DEN (+135%), and IAH (+105%).

Well, during the first part of my career, I used to take a taxiway on the left side of the runway after landing. Now I take a right. There is a lot going on (economically) on the north and south sides of O'Hare.

I am talking about economic growth for all of Chicagoland not only the airport.

Gates are most definitely not a limiting factor to passenger growth, not right now at least. Sure, United can't have 600 flights all depart at 9AM but they there is gate availability throughout the day for them to add multiple additional departure banks. Suggesting that ORD would have millions more passengers if only there were more gates is just not accurate.

That being said the city should absolutely be planning for a future where more gates are needed and insist on a committed timeline for S-2, even if the ordering is changed up a bit.

There are two main ways for ORD to grow now without more gates.
1) American could certainly add a bank and possibly even United.
2) The airlines could replace smaller regional jets with mainline.

But ORD does lack wide body gates which limit's int'l growth to ORD and potentially some domestic growth if they would deploy more wide bodies on trunk domestic routes. United has talked publicly that ORD lacks wide body gates at T1, and between 2 and 8pm at T5. Sadly only a 767 can fit between the B and C concourses. This limitation is exactly how ORD doesn't plan for the future.

American did cite this a few years back for T3 as well, but we know this is not a constraint now with having both Aer Lingus and British Airways move to T3. The customs and inspection facilities are also a limiting factor for international growth as everything is in T5.

One of my points is that the city needs O'Hare to grow its passenger numbers as that directly leads to growth in the city. 11% growth at ORD since 1994 is actually a decline in the market. Since 1994 passenger enplanements in the entire US have increased by 75%.

O'hare actually did a really good job in constructing the new runway configuration, but the terminal size and infrastructure are in poor shape. Hopefully the new T2 can get started asap with as minimal cuts as possible.

The whole T2 Global Terminal idea is premised on increasing capacity for larger international jets and creating a new set of customs facilities in that location, in addition to those in T5.

The constraints you listed are *exactly* the ones that will be fixed with the city's new proposed sequence. The satellite #2 would mostly benefit domestic flights.

There was a news conference at T3 today to kick off the T3 upgrade that should start in earnest the next month or two.

The real news though is there was a tone of optimism regarding the overall TAP expansion plans.

https://www.chicagobusiness.com/airl...gates-promised

My hope is we get an announcement sooner than later on the finalized agreement between all parties so this work can finally kick off.

Chicago.Gov photos via Twitter
 

Images inside Twitter

https://twitter.com/fly2ohare/status...79761547345947

https://www.chicagotribune.com/2024/...-ohare-budget/

The big question now is will OGT be VE'd to allow for enough funds to fund the tunnel + S2, or do we get the original spec'd OGT......

Yep. I wonder when we will see renders of the revamped T2. Or eve if we will?

In a sense I am excited to see the T2 being worked on first. Trying to timeline out the prospect of a T2 being done around 2030 or later felt so far away.

Now depending on how fast the timetable is maybe T2 could be open as soon as the end of 2028?

I think you will see work start on S1 immediately, and they will slowly tear down T2 and rebuild it. I would suspect they are going to do that so they can manage gate access during construction through a phased approach since they aren't doing S1 + S2 first.

No updated renderings.... But an updated timetable on construction. I am really curious why this won't get started until next year? The temporary gates at the end of C are basically done..... So much utility work has been done, and it can't take that long to fill in the detention basin in the central part of the airfield. The only real reason I can think of is the process the city has to go through to actually get the money out the door.

https://www.chicagobusiness.com/airl...egin-next-year

It's a fucking disgrace that the city is using the pandemic as an excuse for the delays when other airports did the opposite and used the reduced operations to speed up construction and reduce costs.

We slow-rolled the project and now the costs are ballooning, the airlines are balking, and we're going to end up with a watered down design and potentially no second satellite or a super delayed one at a minimum (maybe 2040?). Financing and construction costs will have doubled before this thing even gets started compared to what it could have been.

I realize hindsight is 20/20 but once again our city government shit the bed on a golden opportunity.

Finally got some new renderings for the first Satellite:

https://s3-rd-prod.chicagobusiness.c...20Norviska.jpg

https://archive.is/ACCF8/34aef4c1bbb...7742ffc925.jpg

https://archive.is/ACCF8/53272c6cd7b...32d8c1b1e0.jpg

https://archive.is/ACCF8/f7d6bfde1f6...8b555324c.webp

https://archive.is/ACCF8/fce483273b3...bf78140e1.webp

https://www.chicagobusiness.com/airl...icle1-readmore

Is that bus setup for a T5 connection? Should probably have a bit more weather protection given the climate...

Extremely happy with this design. It's not anything crazy, but it's very sexy. Love the emphasis on wide windows with lighting and the nod to the wooden aesthetic we are seeing in the OGT (assuming same design). Also, I find this design much more appealing than the T5 expansion. Having walked down to check out the T5 expansion, while bright, large, and clean - It often feels sterile. This feels much much warmer and a portion of the airport I would want to go lounge at.

      It looks plenty nice. Noting artistic or signature looking about it, nor one that will win any awards, but light, airy, and functional.
 
       While I slightly agree with you about the T5 extension, I think it will look much better when it has some vendors and concessions put in. I love the look of the new T5 extension, even if the all white/blue glass looks a bit retread of a Chinese Airport or Train station.

         Immediately what I was thinking. I am guessing (more hoping) it will only serve as an interim solution until the airside transit train is built. Given unforgiving Chicago weather I hope they have enclosures that practically meet the bus doors. It is one thing to have to walk the tarmac on a sunny Carribean or Spanish island, it is a whole other experience to deal with Chicago cold and winds in mid-January, even if just for 10-20 seconds.

I really like that design!

I suspect the updated T2 design will have similarities, to be more consistent throughout the airport..the question is, did the updated T2 inform the satellites, or vice-versa?
Seeing those large ocular skylites in the renderings above, they look somewhat similar to the updated roof plan and building sections I saw for T2, perhaps the big terminal did influence the satellite designs…and conversely, we may be getting a taste of what the Global Hub will look like based on these images.

If I had to guess, I would suspect the OGT design has influenced the S1 design..... If I recall, the original renderings we saw of satellites was based on a uniform SOM design during the competition. Looks like they went back and made adjustments to bring the S1 design closer to the OGT design......

I really like it. That curved end elevation on the north especially feels very Nordic to me, like something Aalto or Saarinen would do. The interior with the big barrel vault reminds me of the old Willow Run airport outside Detroit.

I also appreciate all the wood tones, I've seen that in some mid-budget airports like MCI and MSY but big-city terminals at LGA, SFO etc are very sleek and cold-feeling. Given Chicago's gloomy weather I think a little bit of "hygge" in the airport goes a long way. Hell, they should even put in some fireplaces and oversized armchairs!

I don't love how the sterile corridor is glassed-in, though. Similar corridors I've seen in Madrid and Vancouver are open-air, it makes the terminal feel a lot more spacious. Is there really such a huge security risk to an open-air corridor?

Yeah, when the satellite opens the only customs facility is still in T5. So they will use the sterile corridor and the bus system to shuttle international arrivals over to T5 for a few years, until the new T2 is built.

I could be wrong but I don't think the train will be sterile though. They might need to build a sterile corridor in the tunnel alongside the train, with moving walkways. Or they just keep using buses, but going to T2 instead of T5.

My recollection is that the plan is for a sterile walking connection from the satellite terminal to T2.

Correct. I also don't think the train itself will come until S2 is built. It'll just be two segregated corridors with the plan to eventually convert the domestic one to a train between OGT, S1 and S2 (if/when that comes). I believe the international corridor will always be just for walking.

I'm a big fan of the design as shown - expectations exceeded. Someone who claims to be in the know over at airliners.net said that if you like this design then you will love the updated OGT design.

Looks fine.

Just build.

Article out with same renderings and some info on Urbanize today.

https://chicago.urbanize.city/post/r...-part-ohare-21

I echo others' sentiments. The design is nice - please just build it sooner rather than later.

I really like the design of the satellite concourse. It exceeds what I was expecting for the design. I love the tree like columns and "floating" walkway and really like the gentle elegant curves, the warm tones and varied textures of the ceiling, and the abundance of natural light.

Maybe this schematic was correct after all? The footprint and massing of satellite concourse looks pretty accurate. Hopefully we'll see the revised OGT break cover soon:

https://ord21.com/SiteCollectionImag...p_20240307.png

Terminal 5 parking garage construction update:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wSjCmblCRtE

• Video Link

Avianca Adds Airbus A320 Chicago O'Hare To Bogota Flights

“With airlines starting to look toward the 2024 winter season, Latin American carrier avianca has announced it is resuming the route connecting Chicago to the Colombian capital, Bogota, after a five-year hiatus. On Wednesday, the airline opened ticket sales for the new nonstop route that will commence on October 27, offering more than 2,500 seats weekly.”

“The route will be operated with an Airbus A320 with a capacity for 180 passengers on the daily flights. It is scheduled to depart Bogota El Dorado as flight AV262 at 07:00 and arrive in Chicago at 13:15. The return flight AV263 departs Chicago O'Hare at 14:35 and is due back in Bogota at 20:25.“

https://simpleflying.com/avianca-air...-ohare-bogota/

The latest update of Google Earth imagery (March 2024) shows the new gates L25 and L27 in Terminal 3 (F26 to open in the fall once the building that is there is demolished. It also shows the temporary gates at the Terminal 1 satellite concourse that will be used while the new satellite is under construction.

Oh, great! Thanks for the update! Keep us posted!

..
...

One thing I find interesting about that article is the updated timeline pushes the detention pond work all the way out to 2033 - Which I find odd.....

That's work they could do at any time given it doesn't really require any closure of major runways, etc...... Plus, there seems to be a lot of work being done down by the South detention pond currently. Problem is, unless you are in the know, it's hard to know exactly what's being done.

The good news is it's not like nothing is being done right now. There's a ton of work still being done West of the C concourse..... They just finished demo of the data building that will let the final 3rd stinger gate be put in later this year. The new parking ramp should be done soon at T5, and T3 work should be underway soon, if it's not already.

I'm still pretty happy with the schedule..... I care more about the OGT getting done than anything. Given the bonds that were issued, and the comprehensive utility work that has been done, there's no reason why S1 and OGT should be delayed further, barring unexpected circumstances.....

I flew to Frankfurt the other day on a full Lufthansa 747 from B16 that was scheduled just half an hour after a flight to Munich (not sure what plane and if it was also completely full...) at B17. The gate area was a complete chaotic shit show from so many people for the two flights. It got better after the Munich people left but I feel like maybe scheduling the two flights so close together is kind of mess? Probably the problem is that B16/17 are too contended. Next time I fly to Frankfurt I'll definitely avoid the 4 pm flight...

Parking lot question if anyone knows. Went on a business trip a few weeks ago. My boss wanted to carpool and drive. When we got there, the garage at the end of the tram was full, so we had to park in Economy lot G. There was a shuttle bus that brought us over to the tram.

On the tram ride, we passed over a completely empty parking lot (I think E) with an empty ghost tram station filled with trash that we didn't stop at.

Why is that station empty and that lot empty when it's closer to the airport than G? Why are they running shuttle busses instead of having that station open?

Hmmmm - Good observation. Looking at satellite imagery, it does look like there's a ghost station there. Maybe that lot has been reserved for construction equipment, or where construction workers park there car? I don't think there's any other plans for that area, so maybe it will open up as a station after all of the expansion work is done?

The old ATS station sits within the Runway Protection Zone and is considered a hazard to navigation for aircraft. It will eventually be torn down.

With many construction projects going on right now and a secure airfield/secure terminals, they do have a need for a lot of worker parking. I'm not sure what the long term plan is for this zone, but O'Hare will continue to have major construction projects for the next 10-15 years at least.

It is odd that it's been there a good long while with the lot closed and no move to demolish it. Would have figured they'd needed to have dismantled it prior to the runway going into service.

Yeah, I'm not sure. Even if it's deemed to not be a navigation hazard, you can't really take advantage of that station if you can't build anything new around it. It'll never be more than a parking lot.

The construction workers who park there now are not, generally, headed to the terminals so they are better using bus shuttles instead of the ATS.

If the air cargo campus needs to expand again it's probably going to do so into lot G and where the CDA building stands I would guess. Maybe they want to keep the option of reactivating lot E if the FAA said they don't need to demo the ATS station and when demand for construction parking winds down post T2 replacement.

https://www.chicagobusiness.com/airl...fic-high-ohare


:tup:

Love to see it.

Yep - I'm assuming UA has it's eye on the long-run with S1+S2+OGT that will open them up to more capacity here. They will get domestic expansion at DEN too, but ORD should be their main international hub.

That seems very strange. The station itself is only a bit higher than a tram itself. Are they going to move the tracks to ground level also? Get rid of the tram all together?