SkyscraperPage Forum

SkyscraperPage Forum (https://skyscraperpage.com/forum/index.php)
-   Transportation (https://skyscraperpage.com/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=25)
-   -   CHICAGO: ORD & MDW discussion (https://skyscraperpage.com/forum/showthread.php?t=87889)

Kngkyle May 23, 2023 2:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by twister244 (Post 9950882)
So - Is work on the new satellites officially underway? I landed from Paris yesterday and there was a ton of excavation work occurring near the end of B. Perhaps it's prep work, but my friend who works for United makes it sound like they are working on a new tram system. I take that info with a grain of salt.

Also, there appears to be work on L, where there's a small addition in the rendering posted.

Pretty sure it is just taxiway work to make room for S-1, since S-1 will block the primary taxiways going around the terminal complex.

The latest timeline that I can find says S-1 will be completed in 2027 and S-2 in 2028. Terminal 2 will be demolished in phases starting in 2026. I'd guess the E-concourse will go first to make way for taxiways coming out of the B-C alley, since the current entrance to the alley between B and T2 will be significantly impeded by S-1 construction.

Given the lack of a tunnel between S1 and the OGT until 2030 at the earliest I doubt we'll see AA use S-1 or S-2 until the OGT is complete. There won't be a way for someone to walk from T3 to S1 or S2 without going through the B-C tunnel.

takascar May 23, 2023 4:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kngkyle (Post 9950956)
Pretty sure it is just taxiway work to make room for S-1, since S-1 will block the primary taxiways going around the terminal complex.

The latest timeline that I can find says S-1 will be completed in 2027 and S-2 in 2028. Terminal 2 will be demolished in phases starting in 2026. I'd guess the E-concourse will go first to make way for taxiways coming out of the B-C alley, since the current entrance to the alley between B and T2 will be significantly impeded by S-1 construction.

Given the lack of a tunnel between S1 and the OGT until 2030 at the earliest I doubt we'll see AA use S-1 or S-2 until the OGT is complete. There won't be a way for someone to walk from T3 to S1 or S2 without going through the B-C tunnel.

Does anyone have a more detailed timeline for when S-1 construction will start? Sounds like they need to start soon if they want to meet these deadlines.

Usually, there are call-outs on contractor websites when they are about to start this kind of work.

gsmith318 May 25, 2023 1:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kngkyle (Post 9950956)
Pretty sure it is just taxiway work to make room for S-1, since S-1 will block the primary taxiways going around the terminal complex.

The latest timeline that I can find says S-1 will be completed in 2027 and S-2 in 2028. Terminal 2 will be demolished in phases starting in 2026. I'd guess the E-concourse will go first to make way for taxiways coming out of the B-C alley, since the current entrance to the alley between B and T2 will be significantly impeded by S-1 construction.

Given the lack of a tunnel between S1 and the OGT until 2030 at the earliest I doubt we'll see AA use S-1 or S-2 until the OGT is complete. There won't be a way for someone to walk from T3 to S1 or S2 without going through the B-C tunnel.

I'm pretty sure this is bid package 32 which is the civil work to prep for the temporary gates needed at C so that they can build satellite 1. This includes pavement and underground electric/sewer work. I imagine they won't start on satellite 1 until the temp gates are ready at C. Since satellite 1 connects to C, they need to close some gates and are building a temporary spur (See bid package 34 diagram at link below) for those lost gates while S1 is built.

Good images under Upcoming Projects to see what they are doing under 32 and 34 if you scroll down here: https://www.tpapord.com/projects/

If you want to see what is going on out there, you can see all of the projects that are out to bid or awarded which will give you some indication of what is going on around there:
https://www.tpapord.com/projects/upc...opportunities/

Tom In Chicago May 25, 2023 3:09 PM

^Thanks for the update and links. . . great information regarding gate relocation at satellite C. . .

. . .

ardecila May 25, 2023 9:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kngkyle (Post 9950956)
Given the lack of a tunnel between S1 and the OGT until 2030 at the earliest I doubt we'll see AA use S-1 or S-2 until the OGT is complete. There won't be a way for someone to walk from T3 to S1 or S2 without going through the B-C tunnel.

I assume they could run a bus across the taxiway during construction, no?

Probably they will find a way to let AA passengers check in at T1 so they can start using the S-1 gates, but they will need a bus for connecting passengers from their other gates until the OGT is completed.

Briguy May 30, 2023 2:03 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kngkyle (Post 9950956)
Pretty sure it is just taxiway work to make room for S-1, since S-1 will block the primary taxiways going around the terminal complex.

The latest timeline that I can find says S-1 will be completed in 2027 and S-2 in 2028. Terminal 2 will be demolished in phases starting in 2026. I'd guess the E-concourse will go first to make way for taxiways coming out of the B-C alley, since the current entrance to the alley between B and T2 will be significantly impeded by S-1 construction.

Given the lack of a tunnel between S1 and the OGT until 2030 at the earliest I doubt we'll see AA use S-1 or S-2 until the OGT is complete. There won't be a way for someone to walk from T3 to S1 or S2 without going through the B-C tunnel.

I believe S1 and s2 will be exclusively united. AA will get a few gates at the new terminal 2 but will largely be unchanged. Major bummer for AA flyers. Might make me switch to united eventually.

takascar Jun 9, 2023 1:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Briguy (Post 9956303)
I believe S1 and s2 will be exclusively united. AA will get a few gates at the new terminal 2 but will largely be unchanged. Major bummer for AA flyers. Might make me switch to united eventually.

Terminal 3 isn't that bad - at least its been remodeled more recently than T2.

I'm surprised AA isn't trying to cut a deal with the city to do some sort of
makeover of T3. They did get the extra "stinger" gates in L concourse, so that's something

Briguy Jun 11, 2023 3:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by takascar (Post 9964513)
Terminal 3 isn't that bad - at least its been remodeled more recently than T2.

I'm surprised AA isn't trying to cut a deal with the city to do some sort of
makeover of T3. They did get the extra "stinger" gates in L concourse, so that's something

Very cosmetic renovation planned, mostly security reconfiguration.

https://chicagoyimby.com/2023/03/fun...l-airport.html

twister244 Jul 14, 2023 3:51 AM

A few nuggets.....

According to @tpapord on IG - They have completed work on taxi reconfigs in prep for the sat construction. So... In theory, we just need to get the temporary gates in place for a groundbreaking. I haven't been to C lately, so I have no idea if work on the temporary gates has commenced or not. That appears to be the only thing separating us from official satellite construction. If I am wrong, please correct me.

I realized the construction on L I saw last month was the Stinger addition (per the 21 rendering) of three (?) gates.

On the airline front.... It appears Avianca may be coming back to O'hare?
https://aeroxplorer.com/articles/avi...and-canada.php

Quote:

Avianca would resume flights to two key destinations in the United States, Chicago (ORD) and Newark (EWR), under the proposal.
This article also lists the following cities on the application:
- Barranquilla
- Bogota
- Cali
- Cartagena
- Medellin

Who knows if this goes through, but it's a start to get more S. America flights in.

While BA is going to extend their A380 flights until next Winter, they may be working to phase the A380 out at O'Hare and replace it with the 777.

https://simpleflying.com/british-air...-ohare-dulles/
Quote:

While subject to change, Chicago is not scheduled to see the A380 next summer: the 777-300ER is scheduled on BA295/BA294.
Again, this is always subject to change given trends, etc.

Finally, I dig some avgeek digging the other night and noticed an interesting trend. Frontier Airlines has really scaled back their presence at O'Hare. If you lookup their flights out of O'hare, they only run four flights a day now:
https://www.airport-ohare.com/depart...ntier-airlines

What's more interesting is Frontier is now operating a larger number out of MDW of around 11 flights:
https://www.midway-airport.com/mdw-d...ntier-airlines
So, up until a few minutes ago, MDW was bursting at the seems with SW running out of space, but suddenly MDW has the room there to add 11 flights? Not sure what to make of it, but I find it to be an interesting observation.

jonesrmj Jul 14, 2023 3:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by twister244 (Post 9991520)
A few nuggets.....

According to @tpapord on IG - They have completed work on taxi reconfigs in prep for the sat construction. So... In theory, we just need to get the temporary gates in place for a groundbreaking. I haven't been to C lately, so I have no idea if work on the temporary gates has commenced or not. That appears to be the only thing separating us from official satellite construction. If I am wrong, please correct me.

I realized the construction on L I saw last month was the Stinger addition (per the 21 rendering) of three (?) gates.

I recently had a layover at O'Hare (PHL-ORD-SLC) and the ORD-SLC flight was out of one of the gates at the southern end of the C concourse. They had a section closed off for construction with the ORD21 branding but it looked like the normal gates were still in place so I'm not sure if that's a sign that the temporary gates are coming soon or if it's just new shops/renovation to the C concourse.

Quote:

Originally Posted by twister244 (Post 9991520)
On the airline front.... It appears Avianca may be coming back to O'hare?
https://aeroxplorer.com/articles/avi...and-canada.php



This article also lists the following cities on the application:
- Barranquilla
- Bogota
- Cali
- Cartagena
- Medellin

Who knows if this goes through, but it's a start to get more S. America flights in.

Great to hear! Correct me if I'm wrong but currently the only South America flight out of O'Hare is to São Paulo in Brazil?

Quote:

Originally Posted by twister244 (Post 9991520)
While BA is going to extend their A380 flights until next Winter, they may be working to phase the A380 out at O'Hare and replace it with the 777.

https://simpleflying.com/british-air...-ohare-dulles/


Again, this is always subject to change given trends, etc.

Wouldn't give much thought to this. The same was true this summer and last summer where BA originally had B777s or A350s scheduled for O'Hare and then later the schedules were updated to show an A380. Then again, I don't know how much BA is able to fill an A380 out of ORD but given that they've been sending a daily A380 to ORD since last summer (with the exception of a break in Jan-Feb), I'd imagine they are doing fine.

I'm curious if any other airlines would ever consider flying the A380 to ORD. The most likely contenders to me would be Emirates and Lufthansa, but Emirates seems reluctant for whatever reason and Lufthansa departs from Terminal 1 which doesn't have an A380 gate but then again, couldn't they just move their departures to Terminal 5 like BA?

Quote:

Originally Posted by twister244 (Post 9991520)
Finally, I dig some avgeek digging the other night and noticed an interesting trend. Frontier Airlines has really scaled back their presence at O'Hare. If you lookup their flights out of O'hare, they only run four flights a day now:
https://www.airport-ohare.com/depart...ntier-airlines

What's more interesting is Frontier is now operating a larger number out of MDW of around 11 flights:
https://www.midway-airport.com/mdw-d...ntier-airlines
So, up until a few minutes ago, MDW was bursting at the seems with SW running out of space, but suddenly MDW has the room there to add 11 flights? Not sure what to make of it, but I find it to be an interesting observation.

It sounds like MDW is going to be the LCC hub for Chicago. I guess it's now only Spirit that has their full Chicago presence at O'Hare. I wonder though if Frontier was incentivized to move more of their operations to MDW since Terminal 5 is very crowded now between Delta's gates and having to fight with Southwest and the International carriers for the common use gates.

twister244 Jul 14, 2023 3:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jonesrmj (Post 9991751)
It sounds like MDW is going to be the LCC hub for Chicago. I guess it's now only Spirit that has their full Chicago presence at O'Hare. I wonder though if Frontier was incentivized to move more of their operations to MDW since Terminal 5 is very crowded now between Delta's gates and having to fight with Southwest and the International carriers for the common use gates.

I don't view it quite like that.

I view Frontier's move as a means to be able to fill their planes by tapping into a different segment of the Chicago market. Maybe they weren't filling their flights at O'Hare given many of their routes have so many other UA/AA routes at prices that aren't that expensive when all things considered. At MDW though, there are probably several people in the metro that don't want to haul ass to O'Hare when they can just hop on a Frontier flight if they are going to city XXX for the weekend. It's worth noting that there have been several pressers over the past six months where Frontier keeps adding routes to MDW. So.... They feel like they have a better business model at MDW.

At the same time, I have to wonder if Southwest had some under performing routes at MDW, so they are taking a stab at directly competing against UA/AA domestic flights. I really don't view Southwest as a competitor to other LCC as they really aren't LCC if you actually look at their ticket fares. Also, the reason I think they are trying to peel some customers away from UA and AA is just by looking at ticket fares between Southwest and UA/AA. For example, if you lookup tickets from ORD to DIA for tomorrow, UA has a flight at 12:48 PM that's $301/$441 for economy/business. Southwest has a flight at 12:30 that's $301/$431 for economy/business. For fun, I looked up Baltimore for next January (I have a conference I'm going to). Southwest has three flights at $139/$154/$214/$264. United also has three flights that day at $139/$169/$199/$259. That's no coincidence.......

Whether Southwest is successful remains to be seen. They are appealing to the casual flyer that isn't point savvy and isn't a reward member with UA/AA.

I just don't buy the narrative that they were looking to expand, and that's why they came to O'Hare. If that was the case, they wouldn't be giving up gate space to Frontier at Midway. It says they are trying to rethink their Chicago market approach.

OrdoSeclorum Jul 14, 2023 5:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by twister244 (Post 9991765)

Whether Southwest is successful remains to be seen. They are appealing to the casual flyer that isn't point savvy and isn't a reward member with UA/AA.

.

I'm a frequent business traveler and I prefer Southwest because a) Midway is easier to fly in and out of. b) It's extremely easy to change flights or modify a flight on Southwest.

twister244 Jul 14, 2023 5:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by OrdoSeclorum (Post 9991890)
I'm a frequent business traveler and I prefer Southwest because a) Midway is easier to fly in and out of. b) It's extremely easy to change flights or modify a flight on Southwest.

Ok, but you were already a Southwest business traveler that was already going to Midway. I'm talking about people that are existing UA/AA travelers. If you're a business traveler on UA/AA, are you gonna switch entirely over to Southwest? Unless they cover all of the same airports you normally go to on UA/AA, my guess is no.

Also remember, Southwest isn't a member of any alliance, nor do they have any lounges. I'm not saying there aren't folks that won't make the switch, but I just don't see that many folks making that switch. Especially with their epic meltdown last Winter. We will see though... At the end of the day, it might be helping to keep UA/AA ticket prices at bay with the competition, so I'm happy with that as a consumer.

twister244 Jul 18, 2023 3:44 AM

Really solid restaurant announcement for T5:

https://www.dailyherald.com/business...-nosh-at-ohare

SIGSEGV Jul 18, 2023 4:30 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by twister244 (Post 9993872)
Really solid restaurant announcement for T5:

https://www.dailyherald.com/business...-nosh-at-ohare

Indeed. I eat food from Dearborn way too often....

takascar Jul 31, 2023 4:54 AM

Temporary Gates under Construction - Concourse C
 
Flew from and back to ORD last week. Passed by the C-Concourse when taxiing back to our gate and was able to see the status of construction. They have removed two jet bridges and have barricaded the area where they are supposed to build the temporary gates. There is also construction equipment digging up the pavement in that area, so the construction of the temporary gates is in progress

twister244 Jul 31, 2023 3:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by takascar (Post 10003443)
Flew from and back to ORD last week. Passed by the C-Concourse when taxiing back to our gate and was able to see the status of construction. They have removed two jet bridges and have barricaded the area where they are supposed to build the temporary gates. There is also construction equipment digging up the pavement in that area, so the construction of the temporary gates is in progress

Sweet! That means we are probably close to an actual ground breaking of the sats here soon (weeks at best). Slight delay from Spring, but still good to see progress.

Saw this editorial pop up on my feed. Nothing really newsworthy in here, except there is some ground truth to what some anecdotal observations have shown, which is AA has pulled back some from O'Hare.

https://www.chicagotribune.com/opini...rb4-story.html

Quote:

You can’t fly on American nonstop from Chicago to Tokyo; Tel Aviv, Israel; or Shanghai, and outside of flights to London, where it works with British Airways, the roster of European nonstops on American “metal” from Chicago now pales in comparison with flights offered by United Airlines in its home city. And it pales in terms of what American was offerings before: The number of seats offered each month by American in Chicago is down, says airline industry blog Cranky Flier, some 20% to 25% from its peak, notwithstanding the much-reported boom in air travel.
To me, this article does seem to have a bit of a pro AA bias to it as it's trying to blame the current situation with Terminal 5 for AA moving it's wide body flights away from O'Hare. Maybe there's some truth to that, but maybe AA isn't doing as good as UA, and they are simply consolidating resources to their hubs to cut costs? It seems to reflect the latter with a quick search:

https://simpleflying.com/american-ai...er-operations/

The only news of UA route cuts I have seen is from NYC, but that's because of the shortage of air traffic controllers and the meltdowns that happened starting with Newark. Sucks to see AA pulling back, but you can't blame them if they are struggling a bit. And as has been noted before, AA serves to benefit the least from the O'hare 21 program. The OGT only benefits the One World carriers and passengers that need to connect from AA in T3 to One World or back. Delta got a new gig over in T5, Southwest has the shiny new addition to play with at T5, and UA is getting brand new sats. AA gets?....... a few new stinger gates? lol

SnowFire Jul 31, 2023 3:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by twister244 (Post 10003582)
Sweet! That means we are probably close to an actual ground breaking of the sats here soon (weeks at best). Slight delay from Spring, but still good to see progress.

Saw this editorial pop up on my feed. Nothing really newsworthy in here, except there is some ground truth to what some anecdotal observations have shown, which is AA has pulled back some from O'Hare.

https://www.chicagotribune.com/opini...rb4-story.html



To me, this article does seem to have a bit of a pro AA bias to it as it's trying to blame the current situation with Terminal 5 for AA moving it's wide body flights away from O'Hare. Maybe there's some truth to that, but maybe AA isn't doing as good as UA, and they are simply consolidating resources to their hubs to cut costs? It seems to reflect the latter with a quick search:

https://simpleflying.com/american-ai...er-operations/

The only news of UA route cuts I have seen is from NYC, but that's because of the shortage of air traffic controllers and the meltdowns that happened starting with Newark. Sucks to see AA pulling back, but you can't blame them if they are struggling a bit. And as has been noted before, AA serves to benefit the least from the O'hare 21 program. The OGT only benefits the One World carriers and passengers that need to connect from AA in T3 to One World or back. Delta got a new gig over in T5, Southwest has the shiny new addition to play with at T5, and UA is getting brand new sats. AA gets?....... a few new stinger gates? lol

Pretty sure you cant do chicago to anywhere in china nonstop period.

twister244 Jul 31, 2023 4:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SnowFire (Post 10003608)
Pretty sure you cant do chicago to anywhere in china nonstop period.

That's because of Covid and CCP policies....... Has nothing to do with O'Hare or any of the carriers here. Prior to Covid, there were several China flights.

SnowFire Jul 31, 2023 5:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by twister244 (Post 10003641)
That's because of Covid and CCP policies....... Has nothing to do with O'Hare or any of the carriers here. Prior to Covid, there were several China flights.

Yes i know there were flights. Its a weird comparison to put in the article though.

twister244 Jul 31, 2023 6:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SnowFire (Post 10003708)
Yes i know there were flights. Its a weird comparison to part in the article though.

Not sure what you are trying to argue here. AA has been rolling flights back at O'Hare over the last year or so. That has nothing to to with China, and nothing to do with Covid.

SnowFire Jul 31, 2023 6:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by twister244 (Post 10003725)
Not sure what you are trying to argue here. AA has been rolling flights back at O'Hare over the last year or so. That has nothing to to with China, and nothing to do with Covid.

Quote:

You can’t fly on American nonstop from Chicago to Tokyo; Tel Aviv, Israel; or Shanghai, and outside of flights to London, where it works with British Airways, the roster of European nonstops on American “metal” from Chicago now pales in comparison with flights offered by United Airlines in its home city.
Its making a comparison with united, while using a city pair that united also does not offer.

jonesrmj Jul 31, 2023 9:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SnowFire (Post 10003739)
Its making a comparison with united, while using a city pair that united also does not offer.

According to current schedules, United will be bringing back nonstop service from Chicago to Shanghai and Beijing on October 29th!

https://www.google.com/travel/flight...________wGYAQI

https://www.google.com/travel/flight...________wGYAQI

twister244 Jul 31, 2023 10:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jonesrmj (Post 10003905)
According to current schedules, United will be bringing back nonstop service from Chicago to Shanghai and Beijing on October 29th!

https://www.google.com/travel/flight...________wGYAQI

https://www.google.com/travel/flight...________wGYAQI

I would take that with a grain of salt, unless United has created a longer route that avoids Russia air space:

https://www.travelweekly.com/Travel-...ssian-airspace

twister244 Aug 1, 2023 3:13 PM

I didn't realize Peotone was still a thing:

https://abc7chicago.com/south-suburb...idot/13266311/

But.....

Quote:

The legislation promises tens of thousands of jobs as it calls for the airport to be cargo only, counting on the Amazon regional distribution center and other warehouses to support the need in a region lawmakers call a transportation hub.
In that case, this would actually be a win for the metro area, right?

Kngkyle Aug 1, 2023 4:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by twister244 (Post 10004381)
I didn't realize Peotone was still a thing:

https://abc7chicago.com/south-suburb...idot/13266311/

But.....



In that case, this would actually be a win for the metro area, right?

Not sure it's needed even for cargo ops... O'Hare and Rockford have that pretty well covered already and I don't think spending untold billions on another airport would be a great ROI. I'm of the opinion that any dime spent on Peotone is better spent at ORD/MDW/RFD.

In recent years O'Hare has been the #1 "port" in the country in terms of value of goods imported, surpassing the Port of Los Angeles. In 2022 O'Hare cargo volume was worth $330 billion. Second place was Port of Los Angeles at $312 billion. For a more local comparison the Ambassador Bridge in Detroit was 8th at $158 billion. It's basically impossible to overstate the importance of ORD to the city and region.

twister244 Aug 1, 2023 5:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kngkyle (Post 10004503)
Not sure it's needed even for cargo ops... O'Hare and Rockford have that pretty well covered already and I don't think spending untold billions on another airport would be a great ROI. I'm of the opinion that any dime spent on Peotone is better spent at ORD/MDW/RFD.

In recent years O'Hare has been the #1 "port" in the country in terms of value of goods imported, surpassing the Port of Los Angeles. In 2022 O'Hare cargo volume was worth $330 billion. Second place was Port of Los Angeles at $312 billion. For a more local comparison the Ambassador Bridge in Detroit was 8th at $158 billion. It's basically impossible to overstate the importance of ORD to the city and region.

The only justification for Peotone is if ORD can't handle the cargo. Given the runways and ample amount of cargo facilities, it seems they can handle expansion for the foreseeable future? In a long-distant future where we have a full TAP build out of another two large satellites (in addition to the ones about to break ground), I'm assuming even then we will be fine?

Kngkyle Aug 1, 2023 5:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by twister244 (Post 10004521)
The only justification for Peotone is if ORD can't handle the cargo. Given the runways and ample amount of cargo facilities, it seems they can handle expansion for the foreseeable future? In a long-distant future where we have a full TAP build out of another two large satellites (in addition to the ones about to break ground), I'm assuming even then we will be fine?

Just looking at google maps you can see there is plenty of space to add cargo facilities around the airport if needed (and I don't mean in the places designated for future passenger terminals). They don't need the crazy infrastructure of passenger terminals. Airfield capacity should be plenty with the new runway configuration and the off-peak timing of cargo operations. Almost all the warehouse facilities are near O'Hare. Peotone is a cornfield.

I don't think there's ever been a business case for a Peotone airport. Just a political one.

jpIllInoIs Aug 2, 2023 2:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kngkyle (Post 10004533)
Just looking at google maps you can see there is plenty of space to add cargo facilities around the airport if needed (and I don't mean in the places designated for future passenger terminals). They don't need the crazy infrastructure of passenger terminals. Airfield capacity should be plenty with the new runway configuration and the off-peak timing of cargo operations. Almost all the warehouse facilities are near O'Hare. Peotone is a cornfield.

I don't think there's ever been a business case for a Peotone airport. Just a political one.

Yep Its always been political. And why build new greenfield when RFD isnt near built out? And has equal or better access to the interstate system with I90, I39 and I88. Further advantage is that the warehouse ecosphere in RFD trends south to I88 Dekalb/Rochelle, whereas the spillover at PEO will benefit Indiana as warehouses migrate to I65. I39 provides the perfect Chicago bypass and I88 stabs a dagger into the center of Chicago and I90 connects RFD to ORD and the NW Chiland.

Steely Dan Aug 2, 2023 2:29 PM

Peotone Airport: the brain-dead corpse that refuses to die

OrdoSeclorum Aug 2, 2023 9:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kngkyle (Post 10004503)

In recent years O'Hare has been the #1 "port" in the country in terms of value of goods imported, surpassing the Port of Los Angeles. In 2022 O'Hare cargo volume was worth $330 billion. Second place was Port of Los Angeles at $312 billion. For a more local comparison the Ambassador Bridge in Detroit was 8th at $158 billion. It's basically impossible to overstate the importance of ORD to the city and region.

I'm not an expert so just playing devil's advocate. My understanding was that ORD's rise as a port was due to being the #1 place where iPhones enter the U.S. Obviously a palette of iPhones is incredibly value dense and measuring by value and not by weight or some similar metric might not give a real sense of the port's importance. If it was #1 for several valuable raw materials, components or perishable goods it might mean more for the local economy for reasons of co-localization.

Kngkyle Aug 2, 2023 11:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by OrdoSeclorum (Post 10005807)
I'm not an expert so just playing devil's advocate. My understanding was that ORD's rise as a port was due to being the #1 place where iPhones enter the U.S. Obviously a palette of iPhones is incredibly value dense and measuring by value and not by weight or some similar metric might not give a real sense of the port's importance. If it was #1 for several valuable raw materials, components or perishable goods it might mean more for the local economy for reasons of co-localization.

Of course there is 0% chance that an airport would ever beat a seaport in terms of cargo weight. A couple shipments of gravel would beat O'Hare in that metric. But O'Hare's importance to international trade is not just iPhones, it's basically the hub for all high-end electronics and I believe pharmaceuticals as well.

I'd imagine there are also good arguments to be made in favor of being the hub for high-value trade vs the hub for low-value bulk trade. I'm not knowledgeable on the subject though.

SIGSEGV Aug 3, 2023 11:01 PM

I flew in from Haneda a bit ago and O'Hare was a shit show. The immigration line was awful, though I skipped it with the mobile passport control app (after being held upstairs for a while), only to wait 45 minutes for my bag in complete chaos. In the end all the bags were actually on a different carousel than advertised, and all in a pile. Renovations are probably part of this but it's definitely not a good look.

Also, in Japan every single subway train has luggage racks and it's amazing... Maybe we'll learn some day to install them on the blue line.

N830MH Aug 3, 2023 11:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SIGSEGV (Post 10006708)
I flew in from Haneda a bit ago and O'Hare was a shit show. The immigration line was awful, though I skipped it with the mobile passport control app (after being held upstairs for a while), only to wait 45 minutes for my bag in complete chaos. In the end all the bags were actually on a different carousel than advertised, and all in a pile. Renovations are probably part of this but it's definitely not a good look.

Also, in Japan every single subway train has luggage racks and it's amazing... Maybe we'll learn some day to install them on the blue line.

Yes! That’ll work! I’m agree with you that. I am sure they will install them on blue line. It will be much easier for them. They don’t have carry in their seats anymore.

Mr Downtown Aug 6, 2023 4:26 PM

Apparently no one else remembers that CTA did install luggage racks on Blue Line trains shortly after the O'Hare extension opened. I was apparently the only person ever to use one, so they were removed about five years later.

Kngkyle Aug 7, 2023 12:40 AM

As someone who has taken his luggage on the Blue Line multiple times I don't think I'd use a luggage rack if one was provided.... easier for someone to snatch it and run if I'm sitting 5-20 feet away from it instead of it being at my side.

SIGSEGV Aug 7, 2023 1:11 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kngkyle (Post 10008442)
As someone who has taken his luggage on the Blue Line multiple times I don't think I'd use a luggage rack if one was provided.... easier for someone to snatch it and run if I'm sitting 5-20 feet away from it instead of it being at my side.

The ones in Tokyo are above all the seats. They won't hold huge bags, but they'll hold carry-on size.

sentinel Aug 10, 2023 1:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Steely Dan (Post 10005261)
Peotone Airport: the brain-dead corpse that refuses to die

Curious, why do you hate it so much?

Tom In Chicago Aug 10, 2023 2:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sentinel (Post 10010800)
Curious, why do you hate it so much?

Not speaking for anyone but myself, but aside from being the boondoggle that it is, it's simply too far away from anywhere people want to be when they fly into Chicago. . .

. . .

twister244 Aug 10, 2023 3:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tom In Chicago (Post 10010836)
Not speaking for anyone but myself, but aside from being the boondoggle that it is, it's simply too far away from anywhere people want to be when they fly into Chicago. . .

. . .

And the other justification for it being a cargo airport doesn't hold up (per Kngkyle). I say, if any airline (cargo or otherwise) sees a justification for that airport, present the evidence of such need. Otherwise, it's just another backyard pet project for politicians....

sentinel Aug 10, 2023 8:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tom In Chicago (Post 10010836)
Not speaking for anyone but myself, but aside from being the boondoggle that it is, it's simply too far away from anywhere people want to be when they fly into Chicago. . .

. . .

There are millions of other people in the surrounding metropolis, including parts of Indiana and Michigan (and yes, even on the Southside of Chicago too!), that would benefit from a southern regional airport, not to mention the economic benefits of having it within Illinois borders, compared to Gary airport, etc. It's already accessible via main highways, and can ULTIMATELY be a boon to the entire NE regional economy.

To fixate on the notion that it's not necessary in the long run is not only shortsighted, but also a capitulation to the incorrect notion that Chicago+land cannot, will not and does not need to grow further.

twister244 Aug 10, 2023 9:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sentinel (Post 10011225)
There are millions of other people in the surrounding metropolis, including parts of Indiana and Michigan (and yes, even on the Southside of Chicago too!), that would benefit from a southern regional airport, not to mention the economic benefits of having it within Illinois borders, compared to Gary airport, etc. It's already accessible via main highways, and can ULTIMATELY be a boon to the entire NE regional economy.

To fixate on the notion that it's not necessary in the long run is not only shortsighted, but also a capitulation to the incorrect notion that Chicago+land cannot, will not and does not need to grow further.

Again though - If the market necessitates the need for the airport, then sure. If there's market analysis that dictates the need for a new airport, happy to see it. However, if this is just a politician trying to put a Monorail in their town, then no - I'm against that.

sentinel Aug 10, 2023 10:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by twister244 (Post 10011258)
Again though - If the market necessitates the need for the airport, then sure. If there's market analysis that dictates the need for a new airport, happy to see it. However, if this is just a politician trying to put a Monorail in their town, then no - I'm against that.

https://idot.illinois.gov/transporta...ect-study.html

"The vision for the South Suburban Airport involves designing and constructing a supplemental, commercial service airfield that will serve the greater Chicagoland area. Located conveniently outside of Chicago, a major transportation hub in America’s heartland, the South Suburban Airport will offer travelers and businesses an expanded array of options in air and freight travel to meet their growing transportation needs."
______________________________________________________________________________

https://patch.com/illinois/newlenox/...-hastings-says

“For people who feel that the South Suburban Airport is a threat to Midway, is a threat to O’Hare, would complete with Rockford, would compete with the Quad Cities, I just think we’re just in a very, very unique geographic situation with an immense amount of growth compared to other regions of the state,” Hastings told Patch on Friday.

Hastings, who represents constituents in both Will and Cook County, said that considering other transportation options throughout the region between the interstate systems, trains, and the Intermodal Transportation Center in Joliet, adding a regional airport only makes sense. He said the airport would be a “natural complement” to other transportation hubs.

He said a new airport “ties everything together” and believes that the job creation and investment into the Southland region would be substantial, Hastings told Patch...
"

"...“What you don’t want is, if you build it, they will come,” Pritzker said previously, according to the report. “Just building the thing and hoping that people will show up to essentially pay for the airport having been built.”

Yet, Hastings said he would have never helped introduce legislation — or even supported it — if he felt like the project would lead to a dead end. Whether that means cargo companies coming forward or regional carriers committing to fly in and out of the South Suburban Airport, Hastings believes it provides a unique opportunity for the region.

He compares the project to Gerald R. Ford Airport in Grand Rapids, Mich., which has been providing international travel for years. The airport allows local residents to fly in and out of the city without having to travel to bigger airports such as Detroit and Chicago.

Like the south suburbs, the Grand Rapids region has continued to develop and grow and has supported having the airport there. Similarly, Hastings believes the addition of an airport in the South Suburban region could only be a positive for local residents and the region’s economy as well.

Hastings points to the fact that Target and Solo Cup will add warehouses along the I-57 corridor in addition to the four Amazon regional distribution centers that already exist. He says that adding an airport to the mix only will help to drive the local economy, while also providing residents with an alternative to driving farther away to fly to certain destinations.


He says as a lawmaker who represents the region, he and others like Harris have to do what they can to help prepare the South Suburbs for natural growth, which he said the additional airport would do while helping generate “a lot of success” for the region."

Steely Dan Aug 10, 2023 10:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sentinel (Post 10010800)
Curious, why do you hate it so much?

because it's like field of drems.

"build it, and they will come"

or more accurately in this case: "build it, and they will sprawl"



the last thing NE IL needs is more mindless cornfield-gobbling sprawl.

i fully support doubling and tripling down on our existing infrastructure.

twister244 Aug 10, 2023 11:04 PM

Ok, but the only people being quoted in those links is.... wait for it.... local politicians!

Quote:

Other news outlets, including WTTW, have reported that Pritzker has expressed hesitation with the project until cargo companies express their intent to actually use the airport if it is built.
https://news.wttw.com/2023/03/21/sou...eotone-airport

Quote:

While much has changed in the 20 years since the Environmental Law and Policy Center’s deputy director Kevin Brubaker began fighting a south suburban airport, there’s been one constant: It’s a solution in search of a problem, he said.

“It was first proposed as a solution to the fact that we couldn’t expand O’Hare Airport. Well, then we expanded O’Hare Airport. Then they decided we needed a new passenger facility for the south suburbs, but the airlines showed zero interest in it,” he said. “So now it’s purportedly a solution to our air cargo problems. But we don’t have air cargo problems. We have O’Hare, we have Rockford, we have Gary. There’s lots of air cargo capacity already in the Chicago area.
Again - The only people pushing this are the local senators trying to land a vanity project for their constituents. I've seen this first hand, and it doesn't work, unless there's an actual need for it. Building something just because some local senators want it is not a good justification for millions of tax payer dollars being spent.

If there was a real need for a third airport, and it was clear O'Hare expansions wouldn't meet those needs, and the additional cargo would benefit the area economy, then I would be in complete support. However, I still haven't seen any evidence that justifies the existence of a new airport.

SIGSEGV Aug 11, 2023 1:46 AM

There's already one failed airport in Illinois (mid-america). A cargo airport might make sense but it would probably make sense closer to Joliet...

Kngkyle Aug 11, 2023 2:39 AM

The Peotone Airport is an even bigger boondoggle than the Red Line extension. It makes zero sense to build this when there isn't a single airline (cargo or passenger) that has expressed any interest in operating out of it.

The state can keep the land they already bought in the event the situation changes in a few decades.

OrdoSeclorum Aug 11, 2023 1:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tom In Chicago (Post 10010836)
Not speaking for anyone but myself, but aside from being the boondoggle that it is, it's simply too far away from anywhere people want to be when they fly into Chicago. . .

. . .

The Peotone airport wouldn't be built because of demand for an airport. People aren't going to drive halfway to Peoria (I can't believe how far it is from the region's center of gravity when I notice I'm there!) to fly to Orlando or Vegas or one of the three or four other conceivable routes. And there aren't enough residents in that part of the region to support a significant airport. It would be a drag on Illinois infrastructure spending and resources in *a way that makes everything else worse.*

The most important reason to oppose it is because it will fracture O'Hare somewhat. ATL and DFW and DEN and ORD are economic drivers because everyone goes to one airport and the node creates a network effect. If JFK and Newark were in one place instead of two, it would be better than the sum of their parts.

Peotone is only talked about because it's a way to get political support from semi-downtstate residents and politicians that want to see development move away from Chicago. That's it.

If Chicago needs a third airport to meet regional travel demand or serve high volume long distance routes, Gary already exists.

moorhosj1 Aug 11, 2023 1:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by OrdoSeclorum (Post 10011659)
The most important reason to oppose it is because it will fracture O'Hare somewhat. ATL and DFW and DEN and ORD are economic drivers because everyone goes to one airport and the node creates a network effect. If JFK and Newark were in one place instead of two, it would be better than the sum of their parts.

Everything converging on one location has downsides (I.e. all CTA trains going to the Loop) and Midway is already the 25th busiest airport in the country. The city of Newark has 300k people and the airport helps keep down NYC congestion. ATL is about to run into problems because they are out of space to expand. I thought competition was good?

Quote:

Originally Posted by OrdoSeclorum (Post 10011659)
Peotone is only talked about because it's a way to get political support from semi-downtstate residents and politicians that want to see development move away from Chicago. That's it.

If Chicago needs a third airport to meet regional travel demand or serve high volume long distance routes, Gary already exists.

Pritzker lives in Chicago and he signed the bill to study the airport. Gary is not in Illinois, so the economic benefits to our state (I.e. parking, jobs, gate fees) are limited.

Busy Bee Aug 11, 2023 2:13 PM

Annex NW Indiana. Problem solved.


All times are GMT. The time now is 11:08 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.