CHICAGO: ORD & MDW discussion

[emathias]

Originally Posted by Kngkyle

I am skeptical as well. But if one person can pull it off and prove his skeptics wrong, it'd be Elon Musk. The cheaper alternative you mention isn't really cheaper when you consider land acquisition costs and legal fees from having to fight every NIMBY in court. You largely avoid those issues when going underground. It's just too expensive to tunnel underground using today's methods which is what Musk is trying to address. Also, just being able to use non-union labor would probably cut the cost in half.

I used to think non-Union labor would save money, until I actually researched it. For many of the complex projects that government takes on, Union labor doesn't actually increase costs. The primary reason being that Union labor has better training and better skills. The vast majority of studies that looked at cost comparisons found that Union labor can result in fewer cost overruns, and reduced chance of having to redo work because they're more likely to get it done right the first time.

[F1 Tommy]

Looks like British Airways will be using 787's starting in April and as already talked about the A380 in May. That replaces the 777 and 747 aircraft currently in use, although you could still see them here as downgrades when the A380 breaks or gets hit by a jetbridge Also three more international airlines coming to Chicago soon.

[nomarandlee]

Originally Posted by F1 Tommy

Looks like British Airways will be using 787's starting in April and as already talked about the A380 in May. That replaces the 777 and 747 aircraft currently in use, although you could still see them here as downgrades when the A380 breaks or gets hit by a jetbridge Also three more international airlines coming to Chicago soon.

Oh yea? Nice.

I hope maybe 2 of the 3 are from South/Latin Amerca. Seems to be the one region where Chicago really lacks versus many of the other US hubs.

[k1052]

I'm suspecting the odds the city will build another A380 gate to be slim. The plane doesn't seem to have much of a future at this point and we don't really need the volume. 787s/A350s plus 737Max/321 variants will be most of what we'll be seeing internationally.

Will be interesting to see if the A321neoLR lets some more thin routes work at ORD.

[jpIllInoIs]

Originally Posted by nomarandlee

Oh yea? Nice.

I hope maybe 2 of the 3 are from South/Latin Amerca. Seems to be the one region where Chicago really lacks versus many of the other US hubs.

I suspect UA will continue to use IAH as their Latin American gateway. ORD definitely benefited from the Continental/UA merger, but Houston maintained the Latin American routes.

[Vlajos]

Originally Posted by jpIllInoIs

I suspect UA will continue to use IAH as their Latin American gateway. ORD definitely benefited from the Continental/UA merger, but Houston maintained the Latin American routes.

We recently flew to San Jose, CR direct, but had to go through Houston on the way home.

[Steely Dan]

Originally Posted by Vlajos

We recently flew to San Jose, CR direct, but had to go through Houston on the way home.

ORD nonstop connectivity to mexico and central america is actually pretty good, but to south america proper there is only the one lone united flight to sao paolo. 9/10 times you'll be routed through houston or miami or dallas or NYC to get to south america from chicago.

hell, my parents went to chile last fall and found the most competitive fare to santiago was on air canada routed through toronto!

it would be nice to see ORD get more nonstop SA service. and with this new international service push with the proposed international gateway, it might just happen. it'd be nice to pick up cities like buenos aires, santiago, bogota, and lima for starters to at least put us on par with toronto.

[the urban politician]

^ Agree. Our relatively poor international air connections may in part explain why we get such relatively poor international tourism

[Kngkyle]

So AA just came out against the deal saying it favors United.

“But American cannot sign the lease in its current form because of a secret provision, inserted at the last minute, awarding additional gates to United."

“The United gate deal creates a clear winner, United, and clear losers: namely, competition, Chicago travelers and American Airlines.”

I don't see what leverage AA has though. Their gate lease is up in May. Unless they are willing to walk away from ORD then they'll need to accept the cities terms. The city holds all the cards. UA/DL/others would be more than happy to fill the void left by AA should they reduce or de-hub ORD. DL has publically supported the deal. No word from UA yet.

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/l...228-story.html

[sentinel]

Originally Posted by Kngkyle

So AA just came out against the deal saying it favors United.

“But American cannot sign the lease in its current form because of a secret provision, inserted at the last minute, awarding additional gates to United."

“The United gate deal creates a clear winner, United, and clear losers: namely, competition, Chicago travelers and American Airlines.”

I don't see what leverage AA has though. Their gate lease is up in May. Unless they are willing to walk away from ORD then they'll need to accept the cities terms. The city holds all the cards. UA/DL/others would be more than happy to fill the void left by AA should they reduce or de-hub ORD. DL has publically supported the deal. No word from UA yet.

Source please.

[Vlajos]

Originally Posted by sentinel

Source please.

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/l...nt=oft02a-1la1

[Steely Dan]

well, that was one hell of a short honeymoon.

[the urban politician]

Why do our public officials act like such buffoons? When you are this close to a deal, you should make sure everyone is on board before making public announcements

[Kngkyle]

Originally Posted by the urban politician

Why do our public officials act like such buffoons? When you are this close to a deal, you should make sure everyone is on board before making public announcements

They've been negotiating this for 18 months. It's possible the city was just unable to please both UA and AA and so they had to decide who to piss off. Naturally AA was going to lose that given UA's larger presence in the city. AA can howl as much as they want, as far as I can see they have little to no leverage.

[the urban politician]

^ So the OHare expansion as outlined can move forward without their signing of the lease?

[Kngkyle]

Originally Posted by the urban politician

^ So the OHare expansion as outlined can move forward without their signing of the lease?

I believe they lose their veto power once the existing lease agreement ends in May. Also going forward neither UA or AA can veto any project that the city (or the other airline) want to do. That is one of the main reasons no terminal expansion has occured - UA would veto anything that benefits AA and AA would veto anything that benefits UA.

[ardecila]

Originally Posted by emathias

I used to think non-Union labor would save money, until I actually researched it. For many of the complex projects that government takes on, Union labor doesn't actually increase costs. The primary reason being that Union labor has better training and better skills. The vast majority of studies that looked at cost comparisons found that Union labor can result in fewer cost overruns, and reduced chance of having to redo work because they're more likely to get it done right the first time.

Maybe all things equal. Did you read the recent NYT article? On East Side Access in NYC, they literally pay a guy full union wages to sit in the break room and make coffee all day. Non-union contractors would never get away with that kind of waste.

[k1052]

AA has few moves, the leases are up. They’ll also be paying through the nose if they don’t get a new lease agreement in place. The city council passed an ordinance that lets Rahm soak them on fees.

[NikolasM]

I can see why AA would be pissed. UAL gets way more out of this.

[Vlajos]

Originally Posted by k1052

AA has few moves, the leases are up. They’ll also be paying through the nose if they don’t get a new lease agreement in place. The city council passed an ordinance that lets Rahm soak them on fees.

Damn Rahm is good