ORD...........Yikes!
 

I needed to talk about this as I could not believe it! For whatever reason, I simply have never flown threw ORD. Everything has been through DEN and the western U.S. and if going east I would always fly A/C most likely through YYZ.

We were coming back from PEK and had a brief stopover in ORD........I could not believe how outdated and simply disgusting ORD is! Maybe other terminals were different but we were flying to YWG ( can't remember the terminal nor do I feel like looking it up right now :) ) I could not believe the depressing feeling for such a well known, busy airport! It felt like we were jammed pack like sardines in this place; old dirty washrooms; the ceiling felt low with minimal light; we were looking for a place to eat and sit down and could find only two places with minimal seating............had to stand in line forever and got seated practically eating on the lap of the couple beside us.

I simply was surprised on the hole this place was..........will be doing everything possible to never set foot through that place again:D The city of Chicago should be embarrassed.

If you think ORD is bad go to IAD or LGA.

You were probably in Terminal 2, one of the original CF Murphy and Associates that has not been massively remodeled or replaced. That's where United flies commuter flights from to places like YWG and other second- and third-rate destinations that I don't feel like looking up right now. :)

You could say that about *insert almost any USA airport here*.

Meh, ORD isn't that bad. In the US airports are owned by the Government (City or some authority) and typically don't get much more funding than the fees they collect (most of which are set by some legislative body). I'd rather have lower fees than a nicer airport. Most of the "nice" elements of airports are built by the carriers not the government (take a look at UA's investment at SFO and BOS; paid for by UA not SF or MassPort). If you want a nicer airport tell the airline you're traveling on, not the City.

Were you flying the express (UX) or AC flights in/out of ORD??? E / F gates (Terminal 2) -- the C / D (T1 main terminal) is very different.

If it's just that, why would be the AA terminal in IAD so nice, and the UA terminal such a dump?

I hate to play can I top this but the IAD United Express commuter terminal is the pits of hell. No food, minimal bathrooms, cold and dark. Plus it's about a million miles from the international gates and up and down 8 staircases. I swear I will never fly out of IAD again. I'd rather drive to IAD to catch an international flight than do the UNITED Express route again!

Because UA gates are still considered "temporary" (and the airport authority is resisting updates and wanting funds from tenants {such as UA}) while B gates are permanent.

there is no doubt in my mind the IAD UX (A) gates are the bottom of the bottom. Especially noticeable because of the adjacency to the nicer B gates.

Some of us call it home :).

It had to be terminal 2. And it does feel like you're packed in like a sardine there. But I wouldn't call it disgusting. I assume at some point US will move to terminal 3, if there's room. Anyone heard any good rumors on this or on who will take those gates? Or if US is staying there?

Just wait until your return flight from YWG. It's the newest airport terminal with nothing to do. They rebuilt that whole airport a couple of years ago with no real improvement for US departures. The US departure corner has a Tim's coffee hut and nothing else.

For my money, ORD is a pretty lower-middle of the range for domestic terminals. I just hate how often flights get delayed out of there. Plus there isn't enough seating or power outlets or anything at peak flight times, either at the gates or in the food options.

IAD isn't a hub for AA and they likely pay higher landing and lease fees which, for the relatively low number of flights they have, aren't that bad. UA likely has a much more complex deal which has them taking on larger responsibility for the facilities they use in exchange for lower fees.

Well, there are food options in terminal A. What I hate is getting to/from Terminal C to/from A. The trains are connected to maximize the amount of walking you have to do. Hardly friendly for short connections, which many UX flights are.

I'd much rather come in Terminal A and depart from Terminal B, as B is very nice and you have the LH lounge there.

And like others said, ORD terminals C/D are fine. It's E/F that's the pits. IAD C/D on the other hand, really needs to be redone like Terminal B.

Billy

Because UA doesn't care about its IAD customers, that's why.

I think that's a little simplistic. It may be more correct to say the UA doesn't think it needs to improve the IAD terminal in order to remain completive...and I think they are right.

You'll notice the recent UA terminal investment has come where there is strong competition. SFO with Virgin and BOS with JetBlue. Both Virgin and JetBlue use their swankiness as a way to court customers and UA has stepped up to meet that. They don't need to do that in IAD. Even the improvements at IAH are likely intended to pull RJ traffic from DFW rather than just make things nicer for UA customers.

Where is YWG?

haha. It's Winnipeg, Manitoba.

In going to venture this was not today as the only YWG flight from ORD today left from C3, although at the time of OP's post, it was just prior to boarding time for that flight.

Of course if it was I. Terminal 2 on a previous day, I'm guessing the OP didn't use the club, as it's as modern as they come.

Been to DEN or SEA lately?

It sounds like the OP has flown a lot of international, where terminals are light-years ahead of US airports, or through DEN, which is relatively new. United's terminal at ORD IS actually quite old and outdated. Small gate areas, few places to sit (other than the small, crowded gate areas), food selection pretty dismal.

If UA is in Chicago for the long haul, they should look at building their own terminal somewhere on the airport property, including adding international arrivals and immigration/customs areas. It would be an investment worth making.

They did build their own Terminal. It's called Terminal 1.

They have outgrown it and have spilled over into Terminal 2. I believe they will eventually take over most or all of T2 as well.

As far a immigration, I think if it were a possibility UA would have already done it. My guess is it has more to do with CBP than UA.

Airports, Chicago. Oh what a tangled web we weave. Airports here are ALWAYS full of controversy and problems funding. O'Hare/Midway and the failed Peotone airport. We support two airports here not just one like most cities. Changing anything takes years of arguing. Just changing and updating our runways was 10 years in the making. Unlike many airports, O'Hare is surrounded by middle class and a few upper middle class neighborhoods and suburbs. Any change that might hint at an increase in traffic comes with overwhelming opposition and most often court cases with suburbs suing the city.

Funding for the airport ... not that easy.

I take it that you don't spend much time in the USA. :) With few exceptions we don't do big infrastructure projects well, and we don't have an airport like YVR, let alone some of the Asian airports (SEA probably comes closest to YVR, and IMHO is overall the best major US airport).

Part of it is that most of the airports were built in the 70s-80s when construction standards were much lower, and people spend less time in them.

of UAL hubs, SFO is IMHO by far the nicest. Big, open International Terminal (G) and an amazing new Terminal E (domestic). And the F terminal is big and open with lots of light, one of the best of the 80s terminals.

Denver is also big and open, but long walks, its functional but utilitarian. Nothing particularly visually interesting, but probably second best.

But of the remaining, I would put ORD third. Its visually interesting with its open glass, and the B/C walkway is still interesting. If you came from PEK you came into Gates C, but with customs your arrival was a little different. And if you then went straight to Terminal 2 (gates E and F) I can understand you feelings. Yes the RJ terminal (where you likely flew out of) is a dump, its old and crowded.

But overall ORD (if you spend some time there in B/C gates) is better than LAX (old and dated), IAH (which other than the E gates is a total cramped dump, with some of the worst RJ gates around) or IAD or EWR which combines bad facilities with rude staff.

Denver is pretty nice. Good places to eat, open, bright, clean.

ORD isn't that bad. Yes it leaks a lot during rain, and yes E/F really are quite horrible (with poor seating and just that icky feel.) And there's a lack of seating in the entire airport.

But ORD probably has the best restrooms of any airport I've ever been to, they're generally impeccable, never smell of stale anything. The bubblers have the water bottle fill stations on them. Once you get out of F the food options aren't too terrible. And as big as it is, it really isn't too tough to get around in.
There really are much worse airports out there. I hate connecting in DTW, LGA is a dump, ATL is hot, overcrowded and a maze, MCO is well, Orlando. The only nice airports (outside of the smaller regional ones) that come to mind would be CLE, SLC, PDX and RDU. I don't think we need newer or hugely modern ones, but no torn cushions, and loads of outlets would be helpful.

As for Chicago airports, one cannot forget the cluster that was involved with the decommissioning of this beauty.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meigs_Field

EWR - A is just about my least favorite. At least there's a UC close by to avoid the chaos.

Only airport I've ever been to that has auto toilet seat covers ^

Try Cleveland. The United Main terminal (C?) was just dirty and disgusting - plus some of the Jetways weren't working when I flew in - we parked, baggage was unloaded, then we moved to a different gate so we could deplane. The satellite terminal (D?) is in better shape - but currently it's all commuter jets (which I was flying out on...)

J

At least they don't regularly use airstairs for mainline aircraft in the US as they do in Europe.

In this case, the airport is just a reflection of the city.

FRA is the first one I remember.

...and if you have to get there or leave, very far fr:rolleyes:m any and everything else.

At EWR last Monday, finding a functioning power outlet was a challenge. When I found one in the wall, it the plug would often fall right out of it and UA boarding areas just had those old style circular charging stations with people huddled around them. Fix the little things and people would be much happier. I don't need to feel like I'm in a brand new W Hotel, I mainly want to eat, sit, and charge my phone in relative comfort.

Your list reminds me of a thread we had somewhere around here listing people's favorite domestic airports. I haven't been there in a bit over a year, but TPA is probably one of my favorites. Generally big and open, logical to get around, fair number of food options. Only downside is switching airlines which normally requires going through security again.

I've seen auto seat covers.

And I've used toilet seat covers.

But I've never encountered these auto toilet seat covers.

Must be some kind of hybrid. ;)

The City of Chicago understands the airport is a gateway to the city and is embarrassed, but they are doing things to improve that image. I'm guessing you were in T2 as the others have mentioned, which isn't the greatest. But the city is making investments into the airport, just look at the new renovation over at T5, www.chicagot5.com. Granted international and common gates, but still, they are beginning to see the need to invest beyond just trying to fix the runways there. Of course, United also just starting putting the new power outlets in T1, which look good.

I've seen much worse airports out there....

LOL!!! Hey, you are absolutely correct about YWG.....but they do have a nice new airport finally...the old one was absolutely horrid! I'm not originally from here (live here now) and also think the city itself is probably worse than 3rd rate:D

It was Express to YWG.......

Nope......this was middle of February..........I'm a little slow but was meaning to get this out and get some conversation........which I see it did:)

Never been to SEA but DEN ........umpteen times. You are not suggesting the DEN is run down are you? If so, I think DEN is 50 times more of an airport than ORD.

oooops........sorry. I see what you were saying now that I read through the posts.

I lived in Winnipeg for years and hated it. I moved away and never looked back. haha. Even when I go back I struggle to see many redeeming qualities.

Have they torn down the old terminal yet or still debating what useless thing to turn it into? I haven't even been on the domestic departure side of the new airport so I don't know what its like, but even in the crappy old building I remember there was a decent AC MLL. But of course the US side of the new building has zero amenities and overpriced fares serving ORD, MSP, and DEN. Maybe DTW? UA and Delta don't exactly give you lots of choices on how to get into the US from YWG.

which is just a different way saying they don't care about their IAD customers.

Hey in June UA has concourse D in CLE avaliable it will no longer be using and still owes a lot for, they can ship the concourse to ORD if there is a way to do that. Actually I think ORD is not that bad.

LMAO - This is so true. About 10 months ago, I somehow forgot about this since all my Delta/American/JetBlue flights had been arriving/departing from the B gate and I booked a IAD-MSP roundtrip. My mood immediate took a turn for the worse as soon as I walked into that terminal and sat down and sure enough, the flight was delayed. I must have sounded like a prima donna to my younger co-workers who don't fly so much because soon after we sat down at the gate to wait for the flight I started complaining about what a ...... gate area it was, how crappy UAL had become and that in retrospect we should have taken the Delta MSP flight out of Richmond instead.

It's torn down.....Thank goodness. I don't mind the new facility as it is very bright, modern and clean for the most part! Both domestic & US departures are more or less one main terminal - you just enter through US customs differently but end up in the main area. To get to any of the amenities it is just a little further walk down to the domestic area - not a monster airport so no big deal.

......and you are correct - not a whole lot of options getting out of here. UA just seems to have the right price especially if it is coming out of my own pocket. Delta seems to be significant higher departing out of here and I'm not talking 5-10% - It can be drastically higher at times. It's really through ORD & DEN with UA and MSP with Delta.

Airports in major US cities are showing age; LGA has got to be my least favorite. Some of the newer airports at "2nd tier" cities are in fact quite nice: SEA, MSP, PHX, etc., possibly many others.