Chicago needs more airport capacity(?!?)

Amtrak Unlimited Discussion Forum

Help Support Amtrak Unlimited Discussion Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Why is the FAA so concerned about a city that has a history of destroying airports? Couldn't some of the load have been handled by Meigs Field?
Blame the Mayor for that one. A truly great airport was Meigs Field right next to downtown. It was great for business people to be able to fly in, go to their meeting and fly out again. But Mayor Daley decided to bulldoze it to make room for more green.

As far as flight demand, its not going to go down. These cutbacks are only temporary, and once the economy takes a turn for the better, so will aviation. O'Hare is doing the right thing by realigning its runways to be parallel, making for a much more efficient operation. Keep in mind they will be decommisioning some runways as well. It will soon look like DFW's layout, just tilted onto the side. They also need a terminal facelift too. New York airports desparately needs work too. If a new airport were built there, it probably have to be built in the bay. I'm not even too fond of that idea. My idea is to make JFK just for international and transcon traffic and LGA for domestic, and have a highspeed tram or train connecting the two for passengers making connections
 
I'm not sure about New York City, but Chicago has certainly tended to be a hub; is there some good reason not to move that hub to some other city?
Chicago is uniquely qualified to be a hub. It is a huge origin and destination market unto itself and is centrally located geographically. That is the ideal combination for a hub operation. For those reasons, Chicago (ORD and MDW) serves as a hub for three airlines: United and American at ORD and Southwest at MDW. Yeah, I know. Southwest does not have a hub and spoke operational philosophy. But MDW sure seems like a hub for WN. There are lots of WN planes coming in and lots of WN planes going out and lots of passengers walking between flights. If it looks like a hub, and feels like a hub: it's a hub.
 
I'm not sure about New York City, but Chicago has certainly tended to be a hub; is there some good reason not to move that hub to some other city?
Chicago is uniquely qualified to be a hub. It is a huge origin and destination market unto itself and is centrally located geographically. That is the ideal combination for a hub operation. For those reasons, Chicago (ORD and MDW) serves as a hub for three airlines: United and American at ORD and Southwest at MDW. Yeah, I know. Southwest does not have a hub and spoke operational philosophy. But MDW sure seems like a hub for WN. There are lots of WN planes coming in and lots of WN planes going out and lots of passengers walking between flights. If it looks like a hub, and feels like a hub: it's a hub.
Aren't lack of congestion and warm climate also desireable characteristics for an airline hub?
 
Airlines tell Chicago more O'Hare expansion would be premature at best

Yes, this is after a new runway was added, so perhaps some expansion was needed. But when the airlines are saying more expansion is unnecessary at this time, maybe they might know a little more than the City.

(Thought I would just revive this thread rather than start a new one. It was originally my thread, anyhow. :lol: )
 
Back
Top