# O'Hare Airport Terminal Expansion



## saxman (Jul 18, 2016)

Chicago has been going through a massive rebuild over the years. Lately it's been mainly a big realignment of runways going from a pinwheel type shape to an all east-west configuration. There's also an expansion of the people mover to a new rental car facility and it will also be a direct connection to the O'Hare Transfer Metra stop.

I've been curious as to when terminal renovations would come about and finally, it looks like they've come up with a plan. From the drawings it looks like they will expand onto the western complex which is empty now. But they still don't have road access over there. One problem is the busy rail line. But take a look:



> http://www.chicagobusiness.com/article/20160714/BLOGS02/160719865/ohare-gate-deal-takes-off-nine-more-now-likely-dozens-soon-after
> 
> O'Hare gate deal takes off—nine more now, likely dozens soon afterThe Emanuel administration and major air carriers have reached agreement on a significant expansion of O'Hare International Airport's passenger terminals, with nine gates to be added by 2019 and potentially dozens more in a brand new terminal a few years later.
> The deal, to be announced tomorrow by Mayor Rahm Emanuel and airline CEOs, should give O'Hare enough room to meet growing demand for "30 to 40 years," according to Aviation Commissioner Ginger Evans.


----------



## SarahZ (Jul 18, 2016)

Awesome. I like the plan to add two more hotels as well.


----------



## Devil's Advocate (Jul 18, 2016)

> The second part of Emanuel's plan for O'Hare is much bigger: the demolition and reconstruction of Terminal 2, at a cost of billions of dollars. How to pay for this still has to be worked out with the airlines, as well as the exact configuration of the terminal. Six proposals were on display at the news conference. Both Evans and Emanuel said it would not involve taxpayer dollars, however, higher fees could be passed on to airline customers, Schwieterman said.


Does any US city pay for infrastructure upgrades with actual taxes anymore? I guess this is why Fitch sees ORD's CPE increasing by 25% over the next five years. Personally I would prefer they add these additional traveler costs to the long list of fees we already pay rather than hide it inside the base fare.

$07.50 - U.S. Excise Tax (per $100)

$04.00 - U.S. Federal Segment Fee (per segment)

$04.50 - U.S. Passenger Facility Charge (per segment)

$05.60 - U.S. Passenger Civil Aviation Security Fee (per boarding)

$17.70 - U.S. International Transportation Tax (per arrival/departure)

$05.50 - U.S. Customs Fee (per arrival)

$05.00 - U.S. Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service Fee (per arrival)

$07.00 - U.S. Immigration and Naturalization Fee (per arrival)



> "New York, London, Berlin, Beijing watch out, Chicago's coming for you," Emanuel told reporters.


If Rahm was aiming to match top tier airports like Singapore's Changi or Hong Kong's Chek Lap Kok, or Seoul's Incheon I could understand and even support higher fees. But the cities Rahm chose to name aren't typically associated with airports frequent international travelers would generally envy.


----------



## XHRTSP (Jul 20, 2016)

Nice to see they're finally getting de-icing pads.


----------



## saxman (Jul 25, 2016)

XHRTSP said:


> Nice to see they're finally getting de-icing pads.


Amen. Why they still do deicing at the gate in ORD is beyond me.


----------



## Devil's Advocate (Jul 25, 2016)

saxman said:


> XHRTSP said:
> 
> 
> > Nice to see they're finally getting de-icing pads.
> ...


Can you elaborate on the concern for the layman among us? I'm guessing that the primary issue is lack of operational efficiency leading to otherwise avoidable delays. If the pads are positioned along the taxi route from the gate to the departure runway then they can operate with improved utilization without inadvertently wasting time and resources deicing an aircraft that is delayed after servicing and before pushback. The other benefit I can think of is that purpose built deicing pads should have appropriate drainage and chemical collection equipment whereas at-gate deicing is unlikely to have such provisions.


----------



## jis (Jul 25, 2016)

A third factor may be that given the convoluted taxiing patterns from the gates to the runways and the extra time taken to push back etc. leaves more time for ice buildup by the time you get to the runway. The difference in time from deice to runway say between Chicago and Denver, which has deicing pads is quite noticeable even though the runways are at a greater distance from the gates at Denver.


----------



## railiner (Jul 25, 2016)

It's been several years since I took off from JFK when deicing was required, but IIRC, we did the initial deice at the gate, where the large bulk of the snow was removed, and then during our taxi out to the runway, we stopped again and did a second deice to get last minute accumulation off...


----------



## saxman (Jul 27, 2016)

Devil's Advocate said:


> saxman said:
> 
> 
> > XHRTSP said:
> ...


When there is active frozen precipitation the anti-ice fluid has what's known as a hold-over time. It's the maximum amount of time from when it's applied to when the plane need to be taking off because at that point the fluid has soaked up as much moisture it can. It's much better to do this next to the runway instead of at the gate because you can be sure not to have to taxi back and de-ice again. Also, the alleys at ORD are congested and gate space is always at a premium. So when it's actively snowing and everyone is deicing, things get backed up. There are only so many de-ice trucks for so many planes. I've waited an hour or more to get deiced while sitting at the gate while passengers are onboard. This goes on while arriving aircraft that have landed are sitting in the "penalty box" waiting for an open gate, when they could have already been opened up. Places like MSP, DTW, and even DFW have pads near the runways which makes for a smoother more efficient operation.


----------



## Bob Dylan (Jul 27, 2016)

Nothing like hearing from Airline Pilots that expierence these things!

I was supposed to fly out of National on the day of the tragic Air Florida crash into the Potomac, but cancelled due to the severe icing and cold that was a major cause of the crash that helped bring down Air Florida!


----------



## Devil's Advocate (Jul 27, 2016)

saxman said:


> When there is active frozen precipitation the anti-ice fluid has what's known as a hold-over time. It's the maximum amount of time from when it's applied to when the plane need to be taking off because at that point the fluid has soaked up as much moisture it can. It's much better to do this next to the runway instead of at the gate because you can be sure not to have to taxi back and de-ice again. Also, the alleys at ORD are congested and gate space is always at a premium. So when it's actively snowing and everyone is deicing, things get backed up. There are only so many de-ice trucks for so many planes. I've waited an hour or more to get deiced while sitting at the gate while passengers are onboard. This goes on while arriving aircraft that have landed are sitting in the "penalty box" waiting for an open gate, when they could have already been opened up. Places like MSP, DTW, and even DFW have pads near the runways which makes for a smoother more efficient operation.


Makes sense and thanks for the clarification. Although I have personally experienced the deicing process from time to time it's not something I see often. We don't have to worry about much icing down here and I generally avoid connecting in cities with a history for heavy winter weather.


----------

