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 Feb 21, 2013 10:53 AM

Kirk, Durbin emphasize O'Hare expansion after AMR merger

Read more: http://www.chicagobusiness.com/artic...#ixzz2LWtUiXk0

----

They've sent letters to the merging companies CEOs nudging them to support the next phase of OMP. They mentioned the regulatory issues that the two companies will have to get past. As senators, Kirk and Durbin could delay the merger. A veiled threat?

Kngkyle Mar 4, 2013 1:27 AM

American Airlines has applied with the DOT to serve Sao Paulo daily from Chicago starting in 2014. Brazil has restricted flight frequencies that must be allocated by the DOT, hence the need for this. United already serves Sao Paulo daily from ORD.

http://www.regulations.gov/#!documen...2013-0041-0001

tintinex Mar 4, 2013 5:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kngkyle (Post 6036954)
American Airlines has applied with the DOT to serve Sao Paulo daily from Chicago starting in 2014. Brazil has restricted flight frequencies that must be allocated by the DOT, hence the need for this. United already serves Sao Paulo daily from ORD.

http://www.regulations.gov/#!documen...2013-0041-0001

I'm not surprised to hear this given the fact that I've met so many people from Sao Paulo that have moved to Chicago within the last year. Must be part of a larger trend

kbud Mar 4, 2013 5:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by migueltorres (Post 6037522)
I'm not surprised to hear this given the fact that I've met so many people from Sao Paulo that have moved to Chicago within the last year. Must be part of a larger trend

Finally some good news with them in Chicago. They seem to have backtracked at ORD internationally the last decade. Didn't AA fly this route and perhaps Rio in the past?

I wish American luck.

denizen467 Mar 6, 2013 8:29 AM

Which South American city has the greatest direct capacity to ORD? I'm really curious where Buenos Aires would fit into that list. Also Santiago.

Kngkyle Mar 6, 2013 4:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by denizen467 (Post 6039906)
Which South American city has the greatest direct capacity to ORD? I'm really curious where Buenos Aires would fit into that list. Also Santiago.

Chicago really isn't in a good position geographically for service to deep South America. AA and UA both have hubs more suitable for South American service. Buenos Aires was tried years ago (by AA I believe) and it failed miserably. There aren't many business ties between Chicago and South America nor many South Americans living in Chicago. So the demand just isn't there to justify such a long flight. Sao Paulo being so massive is about the only city that can sustain service. Rio might be a possibility in the future, and Santiago on LAN but I think that's unlikely. For now the best way to get to most South American cities from Chicago is via Panama City on UA partner, Copa Airlines. 1-stop to just about everywhere.

Via Chicago Mar 6, 2013 9:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kngkyle (Post 6040232)
For now the best way to get to most South American cities from Chicago is via Panama City on UA partner, Copa Airlines. 1-stop to just about everywhere.

Yup. Went to BA last year and ran more or less that route. Hell of a haul. Chicago>DC (9 hour layover)>Buenos Aires on Copa. And then further on to Patagonia after that through an Argentinian domestic carrier. Did the Panama transfer on the return trip.

F1 Tommy Mar 7, 2013 3:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kngkyle (Post 6040232)
Chicago really isn't in a good position geographically for service to deep South America. AA and UA both have hubs more suitable for South American service. Buenos Aires was tried years ago (by AA I believe) and it failed miserably. There aren't many business ties between Chicago and South America nor many South Americans living in Chicago. So the demand just isn't there to justify such a long flight. Sao Paulo being so massive is about the only city that can sustain service. Rio might be a possibility in the future, and Santiago on LAN but I think that's unlikely. For now the best way to get to most South American cities from Chicago is via Panama City on UA partner, Copa Airlines. 1-stop to just about everywhere.

Or even better, via MIA on AA.

denizen467 Mar 10, 2013 12:54 AM

I knew that the legacy carriers' hubs for South American traffic were chiefly ATL, MIA, and IAH, with additional capacity from NYC/LA, but I didn't realize that ORD had nothing but Buenos Aires Sao Paolo. Not really surprising but kinda depressing.

Forgive my ignorance, but are Panama City and Copa emerging as a premier connection route to Central and South America? UA seems to have a particularly close relationship with Copa, so that seems like a very solid endorsement. Are the aircraft, and is the airport, all pretty new and at current world standards of amenities, efficiency, cleanliness, reliability, etc.?

Kngkyle Mar 10, 2013 3:30 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by denizen467 (Post 6044783)
Forgive my ignorance, but are Panama City and Copa emerging as a premier connection route to Central and South America? UA seems to have a particularly close relationship with Copa, so that seems like a very solid endorsement. Are the aircraft, and is the airport, all pretty new and at current world standards of amenities, efficiency, cleanliness, reliability, etc.?

They have a big geographical advantage that most other hubs don't have. From Panama City, they can fly to just about every North American and South American city using 737s. They don't need larger and more costly widebody aircraft like 767s 777s etc.

Pretty much all of their aircraft are brand new as is their terminal in Panama City. They are a member of Star Alliance which wouldn't be the case if they didn't meet all the world standards.

The one South American nonstop destination from Chicago is Sao Paulo not Buenos Aires.

denizen467 Mar 10, 2013 11:11 PM

^ Thanks for the info on Copa. Maybe I can plan a dream trip down to the Andes now via Panama - I understand Quito just closed their world-leading-deadly airport in favor of a new one a little further from the mountains and less prone to crashes!

Sorry above I meant to refer to SP instead of Bueno Aires - I had just watched a travel show about Argentina...

atlantaguy Mar 11, 2013 4:25 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by F1 Tommy (Post 6041509)
Or even better, via MIA on AA.

Or even better yet, via ATL on DL.

Much, much better Customs & Immigration experience. Less rude, less slammed and much nicer overall facilities.

F1 Tommy Mar 11, 2013 9:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by atlantaguy (Post 6045875)
Or even better yet, via ATL on DL.

Much, much better Customs & Immigration experience. Less rude, less slammed and much nicer overall facilities.


The terminal might be slightly better but I like Miami much better as a stop over. Alot more things to do and friends to see.

atlantaguy Mar 12, 2013 3:27 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by F1 Tommy (Post 6046734)
The terminal might be slightly better but I like Miami much better as a stop over. Alot more things to do and friends to see.

I wasn't speaking of the terminals per se, but of the entire Customs & Immigraton experience - and there is no comparison.

And sorry, but I must have somehow missed the part where the conversation switched from Central/Latin American connecting hubs to multi-day layover vacation spots. My bad.

N830MH Mar 13, 2013 1:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by F1 Tommy (Post 6041509)
Or even better, via MIA on AA.

Or if you connecting through DFW or JFK. It's your choice. If you catch the flight at JFK or DFW hub.

DCCliff Mar 14, 2013 8:53 PM

Once again I ask the modertor: Is this thread about O'hare expansion or airline flights, scheduling and destinations using O'Hare? If the latter, then start a separate transportation thread. If there is not enough actual O'Hare expansion news/material/discussion, than drop the thread or roll it into General Developments.

denizen467 Mar 15, 2013 10:49 AM

^ How are you so incapable of understanding that those two things are inextricably linked?

Occasionally there are posts made that go a little astray, but you need to understand some things about this thread.

1. There is simply not enough news to fill this thread with a terminal/airfield development every week. Are you actually saying we must leave this thread silent for months at a time until there is news worthy of posting here? Are you just annoyed when you click on a thread and discover you're not interested in the post? Merging with General Developments is a ridiculous idea and is a waste of what the internet is all about. If you want only hard facts reporting, don't bother with these forums, just read the Tribune or Sun-Times or Crain's.

2. You need to grasp that transportation and public works threads are totally different from skyscraper threads. A skyscraper is almost always a private development on a small plot of private land that needs to take minimal consideration of its connection to the city around it. But a public works project like an airport or a rail line involves governments, public money, taxation, social issues, energy and pollution matters, and even more profoundly they set the tone and foundation for how a city or region will grow many decades into the future. So any transportation thread will be extremely wide-ranging and will occasionally tread even into partisan politics debates.

3. Airport discussions invariably involve aircraft discussions and route discussions. Whether a future 777 will have a wider wingspan is relevant (because of ORD taxiway sizes and gate layout). Whether the 787 is certified for ETOPS 180 is relevant (because the number of destinations may be limited). Whether the AA merger with US Airways is approved by the government is relevant (because merging with a different carrier could affect ORD's role as a hub). I'm sorry if we discuss whether UA is adding satellite-based broadband in its aircraft when ORD news is slow, but the health and strength of UA is essential to ORD. As you may have noticed, ORD expansion is ultimately funded in large part by UA and AA and so we are all stakeholders in how the companies are managed.

4. You have managed all of 57 posts in 6.5 years (will little effort put into spelling or typing them) on SSP, which means many months can go by without you posting a single thing. So your own preferences take precedence over the other forumers exactly why?

atlantaguy Mar 16, 2013 4:56 AM

^Touche, denizen247.

I come to and comment in this thread because I'm very interested in the ORD expansion, love Chicago and happen to be married to the transport industry.

DCCliff Mar 18, 2013 10:11 PM

Denizen, I agree with most - but not all of your points. Simply make the thread topic Chicago area air transport. Easy.

You would probably be surpised at what I DO understand; don't be patronizing.

Citing my posting frequency is petty and irrelevant. You should be happy I don't post more - - you'd be bored to tears.

I will try to watch my typing . . . .

denizen467 Mar 21, 2013 9:36 AM

^ Oh, a thread name change, if you put it that way that's an interesting suggestion. At least until there is an active construction site on some public buildings at O'Hare.

I don't think you should hold back posts just because you think they are boring. But there is a wag the dog feeling when people who seem minor participants try to call the cops (moderators) on active participants in the middle of an enthusiastic discussion. It's so hard always to know how many active readers there are who are silent, so why not make your presence known once in a while if you are a frequent reader, it doesn't matter if it's a boring comment or question.

---

To throw in an on-topic, vaguely O'Hare-related comment, I was thinking the hyper-unlikely scenario of the Cubs playing in Rosemont would have one interesting side effect - they could market themselves to travelers with long layovers. But I think the site would be like within a hundred yards of a runway path, maybe quite a problem for various reasons.


All times are GMT. The time now is 6:14 AM.

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