FAA "disses" O'Hare

pilot602

If specified, this will replace the title that
FAA \"disses\" O\'Hare

[ QUOTE ]
WASHINGTON (CNN) -- Federal aviation officials, citing a huge increase in flight delays at Chicago's O'Hare International Airport that is affecting flights across the country, is summoning airlines to Washington in an effort to seek voluntary flight reductions at O'Hare.

"We cannot permit O'Hare congestion to ground an economy and aviation system that are both roaring back," Mineta said in a written statement. The meeting is scheduled for August 4.

"O'Hare's on-time performance is unacceptable and has a substantial ripple effect on our nation's aviation system. It is critical that all O'Hare carriers set schedules that better match the airport's current capacity and keep passengers moving," the statement said.

Flight delays have skyrocketed at O'Hare, both because of airline competition and the introduction of a new airline into the Chicago market.

A record 58,600 flight delays through June has exceeded the total in the three previous years, FAA Administrator Marion Blakey said. Since many flights are being delayed for an hour or more, passengers are not making connections in other cities, she said.

In calling the August 4 meeting, Transportation Secretary Norman Mineta invokes newly granted authority under the FAA's Vision 100 reauthorization, passed by Congress in November 2003, by "determining that a meeting is necessary to meet a serious transportation need and achieve an important public benefit.

[/ QUOTE ]
 
Re: FAA \"disses\" O\'Hare

[ QUOTE ]
A record 58,600 flight delays through June

[/ QUOTE ]
58,600 Delays in June??? That is an averave of 1953 flight delays daily!
 
Re: FAA \"disses\" O\'Hare

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
A record 58,600 flight delays through June

[/ QUOTE ]
58,600 Delays in June??? That is an averave of 1953 flight delays daily!

[/ QUOTE ]

I think it meant 58,600 delays from January - June which would make it a little over 300 delays daily
 
Re: FAA \"disses\" O\'Hare

I'll solve the problem for them in one fail swoop, build more runways - all parallell, preferably 3 or 4 on either side of the main terminal, then you can have as many parallell approaches as you need to fit the traffic.

That might take some to build???? Hmmmmm - in the mean time why not spread the schedules out, instead of trying to fir the flights into 6am-11pm, there's a load of hours in the middle of the night where you could put the traffic!!!!! - oh drat - noise restrictions!!!!!!!!!

I know, spread the load, United and American both have hubs there - so they should make sure that when one of them is on a departure push, the other has no flights at all in either direction, then the other airline has an arrival push, etc. so that you can have 4 runways on departures, then 4 on arrivals.

Current layout means they need to get slacker LAHSO's as well to ease the problems.

And the final suggestion is probably the best one: use bigger planes, so you have fewer flights. That is put a 757 on in place of two 737s or RJs. Put a 767 or 777 or 747 or MD-11 in place of two 757s. Duh!!!!!! Obvious - if customers no longer find the airport reliable as a place to make connections, then the airlines will end up with fewer flights there any way as people choose alternate routes.

Why is it they need a meeting to figure all this out?
 
Re: FAA \"disses\" O\'Hare

This problem is fairly easy. Two major airlines running a hub out of one airport doesn't work. Neither can make money, and to serve the same markets they have to each run the same frequencies. So one goes away and the markets still get served, only with larger airplanes. O'hare still runs big numbers of pax through, but with almost no delays.
 
Re: FAA \"disses\" O\'Hare

Just using bigger planes and adding runways is easier said than done. But I agree it does create a lot of traffic with United and American both using ORD as a hub.
 
Re: FAA \"disses\" O\'Hare

Doubt LAHSO will work...most airlines can't accept them.


Don't know what can be done in the short term to fix ORD. I have sat in many delays there.
 
Re: FAA \"disses\" O\'Hare

I think closing Meigs down might have had a little bit of an impact on this. Now those slow bug smashers have to land at O'Hare, which slows down the airliners, which increases delays, etc.....
 
Re: FAA \"disses\" O\'Hare

Yeah, I was going to comment on Meigs as well.

They could always reopen it. And expand it. Was watching this cool think on the larger airport in Japan that is on a manmade island. Seems a good way to deal with traffic problems around that area, is to just expand an existing airport, right? And move the smaller stuff there as much as possible.
 
Re: FAA \"disses\" O\'Hare

Three miles separation is three miles separation! /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif

It's going to be consumers choice between an on-time departure or billions of tiny jets with loads of frequency, but not both.
 
Re: FAA \"disses\" O\'Hare

...or increase landing fees, which increase ticket cost, which decreases demand, which decrease the number of flights! (at least in theory)

JR
 
Re: FAA \"disses\" O\'Hare

In 2000 it was LGA. They did nothing to change it despite the "summer of discontent" - a series of unauthorized slow downs (read "wildcat strikes") by NY ATC.

LGA is still a mess from what I hear.

How is ORD going to be different?
 
Re: FAA \"disses\" O\'Hare

Oh man.. there's a flashback ... darned Elasticity . it get's ya all the time !!

/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/tongue.gif
 
Re: FAA \"disses\" O\'Hare

Gahh. I was just starting to forget all that. It was Micro for me. Luckily, I just studied and took the Micro CLEP test. I was subjected to torture in the actual class.
 
Re: FAA \"disses\" O\'Hare

Eh, just bulldoze it in the middle of the night and build a casino...problem solved.

Nobody wants to go to Chicago anyhow. I say Chicago should be for Chicagoians...and no one else.

Naunga (removing tongue from cheek).
 
Re: FAA \"disses\" O\'Hare

[ QUOTE ]
I say Chicago should be for Herr (Mayor) Dailey...and no one else.


[/ QUOTE ]

Fixed. /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smirk.gif
 
Re: FAA \"disses\" O\'Hare

Yeah. I just saw on the news that they are decreasing major flights but increasing regionals. That doesn't make much sense. Also, where would the airport expansion take place? Isn't it packed aready?
 
Back
Top