Not to be picky, but there is only 1 A380 gate being readied. I think it shows how late and short term Chicago planners have become. It also lacks more int'l gates, T5/T2/T3 security space (it is an embarrassment to the city), no Lounge space, no room at T1 for 787s as they don't fit the old 767/DC-10 gates, no additional mainline space at T2/T3. I guess more regionals ������...

Don't get me wrong, the new runways are good if you like 25 minute taxis, but the terminal situation is horrible. I believe it's been close or over 15 years since the plans were drawn for new T4 and T6, and a major overhaul to T2 (star a alliance).

Do the 787s have too much wingspan or something? It's a blessing in disguise for our airport, since the bait-and-switch with 9-abreast economy has been reviled by passengers across the world.

Looking forward two years, will UA's A350XWBs also have some kind of compatibility issue with the same gates?

How about the 773 that UA is rolling out next year to replace the original jumbo -- it's longer than the 772 and 744, so will it have problems using their gates?

Widebody compatible
 

Yes, the 787s wingspan is close to the 777 so they can't fit in between the B and C gates. The 77Ws wil be able to fit at the same gates that are 744 compatible today. So in essence T1 has only 7 gates that can house the 772, 77W, 788, 789, or the 744. This includes UA being able to park a 772 at the northeast end of the C concourse (I can't remember which gate). I haven't seen them do this in a while.

I haven't seen an announcement from UA, but everything I've read seems to point that their 77W fleet will not be based at ORD, but rather Newark or SFO. I hope that's wrong...

SFO expands to Asia, Newark to Europe, Houston to Latin America and ORD to the heartland via regionals:( UA's hometown airline?

Well UA has 4 ultra long haul flights from ORD (Tokyo, Beijing, Shanghai, Hongkong) (there's also Saon Paolo, but it's only 11 hours on a 767) and half of those are on a 744. So, when UA finishes retiring its 744 fleet 30 months from now, that would be quite a downgauging if they didn't use the 77W here. Especially considering growing economic (and all other) ties to China.

I feel what you're saying. But:

1) The characterization you painted is not an entirely illogical stationing of intercontinental routes. Plus, importantly, ORD does retain direct connections to virtually all the key economic and political capitals of East Asia and Europe. The fact that, for example, SFO just got nonstops to Chengdu, Xian, Hangzhou, or Auckland is not (as of 2016) a particularly big cause for envy or dissatisfaction. The only SFO destination I'd truly care about is Singapore, and even then it's a tossup whether one would prefer a breather at one of the intermediate cities versus 17 uninterrupted hours breathing other people's sneezes and using increasingly dirty lavs. (Dubai and a couple other Europe nonstops would be nice for our city to have though.)

2) Are you saying UA wants more jumbo gates at ORD but just can't get them? I have not heard of capacity complaints like that from UA; it seems like it's normally anti- terminal expansion and just wants upgrades re amenities and smoother security checks. To what extent are T1/T2 gate capacity constraints shutting out the direct flights you're alluding to?

This is silly. ORD is not positioned geographically to be the primary hub to any continent other than North America. It is, however, positioned perfectly to be the jack of all trades. It has all the key routes to Asia, Europe, and South America. It is arguably the best all-around hub in the country. ORD may not be a 77W base for UA but it will be a A350 base, which is just about as capable an aircraft as the 77W.

UA and the city have both said that they are working on gate expansions for both AA and UA. The AA plan was announced a few months ago and was said to be just the tip of the iceberg. The UA plan has yet to be announced. You also have to remember that gate layouts are not permanent. The airline can move gates and resize them as necessary for their operations. DC-10s, L1011s and 747s used to dominate Terminal 2. Now it is all regional jets.

ORD is serving more passengers than ever to more destinations than ever - especially internationally. There is almost no basis to be pessimistic about the current status or future of the airport.

The CDA's terminal plan isn't out until July so lets just take a breath for a second. Given the strong growth at the airport, the gate leases coming up, and having what will probably be the final airfield package sewn up the city's hand couldn't be stronger to negotiate major terminal expansions/updates with AA/UA.

Also some good news is that UA and AA will both be using 777-300's out of Chicago next year on a regular basis. As fare as making them fit, look at all the AA 787 flights daily...And even a A330 now. You reconfigure and make it work.

Gates
 

There absolutely is a widebody gate shortage at ORD, the airport and airlines have stated this for T5 and T1. SkyTeam also wants to consolidate at ORD (discussed about a year ago) with Delta, Air France and KLM at T2, but Delta can't even park a widebody at T2. I'm not sure I've read this about AA.

The geography hub location is accurate, but when you read UA upgauging Tel Aviv/SFO daily it sort of sucks. Hopefully there will be a real long term plan this summer beyond adding more regional gates.

So if there is a terminal announcement, what do you think it will be:
1) The original OMP announcement (new T4, new T6, renovated T2)?
2) Western terminal?
3) Add int'l gates to the east side of T5?
4) Renovate existing terminals to add customs and immigration to T1 and T3?
5) More regional gates?
6) Other

The point of message boards is to discuss these topics which is fun. Thanks for the input.

I think the first will be more regional gates(Already approved), although the Republic Airlines meltdown is slowing E175 usage until 2017. The east side gates on T5 will be after that(maybe). Yes they do have a widebody gate shortage but you can kick non mainline international carriers off the domestic terminals and park them at a hardstand between flights if it gets to bad.

Obviously its just a pure speculative guess but I'd go any of the above except #2. Also #1 I don't find very likely either as much as I wish.

I think 3 and 4 are more likely.

And the more I'm thinking about O'Hare's future the more I think an airside express mover between T5 and the Domestic Terminals could really be helpfully and give a leg up. I know American uses some sort of limited shuttle bus for its flights/partners? right now but as far as I know that is all there is.

For international passengers not to have to rescreen and making connecting flights by having to exist the airport would be a HUGE convenience that would trump some other major US gateways as well

A tremendous way to waste a lot of money. A tunnel from L concourse area of T3 would be a hell of a lot cheaper. The only thing that could justify an airside mover is the Western Terminal and even then I'm skeptical due to cost. BA runs a shuttle to T5 with limited hours for their passengers from the end of the T3 K concourse.

I agree that an ATS track style people move would be a big expense but what about the perimeter access road lining right up against the terminals themselves? Couldn't some enclosed stations be built connected to the terminals themselves that could run regularly scheduled service (every 15 minutes) from T5 to the other terminals? Similar to BA but only more frequent and visible.

Maybe there is already a service like this I'm not sure. All I know is that I've read a number of passenger gripes about having to exit T5 at O'Hare and having to renter via security to catch domestic flights (or vice versa). Seems HIGHLY inconvenient and tedious to me but not uncommon for other US airports (I think one has to do similar at LAX and JFK as well). If security could be bypassed though I think O'Hare would be a much preferred transit point for international travelers.

I don't think it's ever been discussed here, but the Balmoral bridge over Mannheim could have been constructed as a simple straight roadway westwards, dovetailing nicely right into the T5 parking lot / Bessie Coleman cloverleaf area. But it was not. Instead, it's this crazy loop northwards, routed almost as if to leave maximum airport expansion space possible to its south. (I don't know if the road connection has opened yet, but an under-construction view is available on Google Maps aerial images.) Even more so if for some reason they were to additionally relocate the ATS yard.

So that suggests they may have big plans eastwards from T5. Also keep in mind some useful reshaping of the gradual 90 degree ATS curve there would probably not be hugely expensive if needed.

The ATS yard is sitting on increasingly precious space, and all the rental car lots are about to become available land, so why not relocate the ATS yard to the area that includes the otherwise restricted spaces east of 27R and the future 27C.

It would help outbound connecting international travelers not flying AA/UA (or their partner airlines who operate out of their terminals). Inbound you still have to re-clear domestic security after exiting immigration anyway.

As far as I know, a new airline to serve O'Hare. Cool. Keep 'em coming.

EVA Air to add non-stop flights from Chicago to Taipei

I edited the Trib title because I would like to believe that Chicagoans are smart enough to know that Taipei is, in fact, in Taiwan. Because ... where else would it be?

They do have a history at O'Hare as a cargo airline, but this passenger service will be new for them.

I think this will become the 2nd-longest route, by flight duration, from ORD. I believe Hongkong flights are the longest; they exceed 16 hours at times. Taipei should be maybe a half hour shorter. (The timetable mentioned in the news article includes a bunch of extra time for taxiing and other time incidentals, so you can't really go by it.) Probably safe to asssume they will be flying 777s.

One can also conclude that, since EVA is in Star Alliance, it's unlikely UA will add TPE flights from O'Hare in the foreseeable future (especially since UA goes there direct from San Francisco).

Anyway, hurray for an airline maximizing T5 space by offering a midnight departure!

I wonder if Ginger Evans offers discounts to airlines using ORD at off peak times. You'd think some congestion pricing should apply to landing fees, gate leases, etc.

A380
 

Emirates 235 on July 19th to O'Hare is scheduled to be an A380.

I hope they finish the A380 gates in time!!! Last time a A380 came into ORD was when the Airbus A380 Demo came in to show off and rub in Boeing's face :)...Who's laughing now?? I think Boeing as the A380 has not sold 800-1000 frames, the prediction from Airbus when it went on sale. :D


I want Airbuses accountant as according to them it is now making money. I am sure they wrote off a lot of the costs, but come on.

On that day only (as far as you are aware), or starting with that day?

And what's the best place for somebody without a ticket to see the T5 tarmac/gates? I'm not that foamy, but just in case one happens to be dropping off or picking up family or friends at the right time or something.

A380
 

I believe it's just 1 day as a sub to coordinate with the opening of ORD's first A380 gate. Emirates will get a lot of free press out of it. But I don't believe any carrier will fly regular whale service to ORD this year.

I have 2 questions based on articles I've read:
- is ORD actually retrofitting 2 gates or 1 for A380 compatibility?
- will the retrofits offer 3 or 2 boarding bridges? And if 2 will the second one be able to serve the A380 upper deck but be flexible as a 2nd door serving a 77W or 747?