$8.5 billion O'hare expansion? New Global Terminal?
Dec 7, 22, 2:11 pm
#31
Suspended
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Watchlisted by the prejudiced, en route to purgatory
Programs: Just Say No to Fleecing and Blacklisting
Posts: 102,103
A(nother) Priority Pass lounge at T5 should be able to get plenty of guests given the level of domestic stuff nowadays -- and then it's a function of revenue from the PP business + (other airlines) vs the costs (the costs ORD hits them with + the staffing/supplies/service costs). But for this to have more of a chance would require opening up the possibility for non-airline(holding company)-operated lounges at ORD.
Dec 8, 22, 8:47 am
#32
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: ORD
Programs: AA, UA, GE
Posts: 5,074
A(nother) Priority Pass lounge at T5 should be able to get plenty of guests given the level of domestic stuff nowadays -- and then it's a function of revenue from the PP business + (other airlines) vs the costs (the costs ORD hits them with + the staffing/supplies/service costs). But for this to have more of a chance would require opening up the possibility for non-airline(holding company)-operated lounges at ORD.
Apr 9, 23, 6:49 am
#34
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 826
This is taxiway realignment of A and B, plus the extension of the tunnel down to south cargo. A lot of enabling projects for the OGT and Sats.
Aug 11, 23, 2:38 pm
#35
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Aussie in ORD
Programs: Marriott Plat, Ua Gold, GE.. Sucker for punishment
Posts: 4,227
Yeah, LOTS of construction on landing last night. Looks like construction has started on the new terminals!
https://ord21.com/signature_projects...oncourses.aspx
Big question is.... new lounges?
https://ord21.com/signature_projects...oncourses.aspx
Big question is.... new lounges?
Aug 13, 23, 4:29 pm
#36
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 826
Yeah, LOTS of construction on landing last night. Looks like construction has started on the new terminals!
https://ord21.com/signature_projects...oncourses.aspx
Big question is.... new lounges?
https://ord21.com/signature_projects...oncourses.aspx
Big question is.... new lounges?
Nov 29, 23, 8:51 am
#38
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 1,314
Nov 29, 23, 3:20 pm
#39
Join Date: Jun 2014
Programs: EY
Posts: 814
Nov 29, 23, 5:11 pm
#40
Join Date: Jun 2014
Programs: UA MM
Posts: 3,841
The overall project provides for a significant increase in the number of gates (not counting the T5 expansion). I'm sure the airlines are all for this aspect as ORD is about the most gate capacity starved airport in the country. It looks like they aren't quite as keen as they were earlier on paying for the convenience of having at least some of the *A and OW INTL operations co-located with domestic operations. Or maybe not as fancy as they once wanted.
Nov 30, 23, 5:30 am
#41
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 826
The overall project provides for a significant increase in the number of gates (not counting the T5 expansion). I'm sure the airlines are all for this aspect as ORD is about the most gate capacity starved airport in the country. It looks like they aren't quite as keen as they were earlier on paying for the convenience of having at least some of the *A and OW INTL operations co-located with domestic operations. Or maybe not as fancy as they once wanted.
People are tending to forget, it's not just UA and AA that signed the dotted line. There's close to 16 other carriers that are apart of this too with WN being one of them. The city is not in a good spot because you'll have carriers that want to grow and those than want to limit growth by others.
Nov 30, 23, 8:01 am
#42
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: ORD
Programs: AA, UA, GE
Posts: 5,074
The total number of gates really don't increase all that much, it's the flexibility of what type of aircraft can be gated that's making the difference. The whole we're moving everyone over who is part of *A and OW has always been a fallacy. The only carriers both UA and AA would take over would be JV's. Nothing in the lease forces them to take everyone.
People are tending to forget, it's not just UA and AA that signed the dotted line. There's close to 16 other carriers that are apart of this too with WN being one of them. The city is not in a good spot because you'll have carriers that want to grow and those than want to limit growth by others.
People are tending to forget, it's not just UA and AA that signed the dotted line. There's close to 16 other carriers that are apart of this too with WN being one of them. The city is not in a good spot because you'll have carriers that want to grow and those than want to limit growth by others.
Why should we expect a business to pay for something that would be to its financial disadvantage? UA and AA currently have a lock on the vast majority of the gates and slots at ORD. Whys should they pay for an expansion that allows any significant increase in competition?
Not that it wouldn't be a benefit to the traveling public. If it would represent an increase in revenues for the CDA or the city itself, maybe there should be better public financing for the expansion. Or involving airlines that could grow their presence at ORD.
Nov 30, 23, 9:38 am
#43
Join Date: Jun 2014
Programs: UA MM
Posts: 3,841
+1
Why should we expect a business to pay for something that would be to its financial disadvantage? UA and AA currently have a lock on the vast majority of the gates and slots at ORD. Whys should they pay for an expansion that allows any significant increase in competition?
Not that it wouldn't be a benefit to the traveling public. If it would represent an increase in revenues for the CDA or the city itself, maybe there should be better public financing for the expansion. Or involving airlines that could grow their presence at ORD.
Why should we expect a business to pay for something that would be to its financial disadvantage? UA and AA currently have a lock on the vast majority of the gates and slots at ORD. Whys should they pay for an expansion that allows any significant increase in competition?
Not that it wouldn't be a benefit to the traveling public. If it would represent an increase in revenues for the CDA or the city itself, maybe there should be better public financing for the expansion. Or involving airlines that could grow their presence at ORD.
I went back and found in statements from a year or two ago that the overall gate increase is nominally 25% so let's call that an increase of 45 gates. Ten have gone into T5 so, you'd think, the T1/T2 rearangement and construction will add 35 gates. Maybe the goal has changed? I know both AA and UA stated they want more than they have today.
