Chicagoist: ORD, MDW, ???

kgvs72

Fri, 19 Sep 2008 12:28:22 -0600

How about using under used airports like Gary's and airports in the suburbs by linking to high speed trains to bigger cities? Gary's airport is not far from the Metra South Shore Line. The airport could provide shuttles to that train station. The US has fallen big time when it comes down to high speed trains. Well they haven't because there is no infrastructure for high speed trains.

Tower18

Thu, 18 Sep 2008 20:38:07 -0600

Rubber Shark, as was mentioned, if Chicago really does need a new airport, Gary is in the best position. However, this isn't about Chicago needing more airport capacity, IMO. This is about somebody needs a paycheck in the form of a government project.

Rubber Shark

Thu, 18 Sep 2008 15:34:30 -0600

what about RFD (Rockford)? I worked out there for years and it's fully capable of taking on the burden. At one point there were three airlines, plus the UPS hub going in and out of there. Not to mention, there's plennnnnnty of parking!

Tower18

Thu, 18 Sep 2008 15:13:34 -0600

Jesus, how much would it cost to build a totally unnecessary airport from the ground up? Not to mention that after all the time and the money spent, you have an airport that is 46 miles from Chicago, and 15 miles from even the most outlying South suburbs. What a waste. I'll call it the Runway to Nowhere.

Chicago D

Thu, 18 Sep 2008 14:52:20 -0600

OMG or WTF. Whatever. Since SUX is taken, it hardly matters. *sigh*

The Meteorologist

Thu, 18 Sep 2008 14:45:23 -0600

or... ORD, MDW, WTF?

The Meteorologist

Thu, 18 Sep 2008 14:45:08 -0600

ORD, MDW, OMG

matty

Thu, 18 Sep 2008 14:30:41 -0600

"Appreciated but did not care." heh

happyfunball

Thu, 18 Sep 2008 14:23:58 -0600

I still like the Peotone idea. Send more shit downstate, pleez...

dopplerd

Thu, 18 Sep 2008 14:19:31 -0600

Isn't there already an airport 45 minutes from the loop that is not being used? Just because it is in Gary (and IN) doesn't mean that it is not a fully functional airport. I think the Ohare expansion is a good thing but there are other options before the Peotone disaster gets the green light. Also should we really be listening to any administrator in the Bush administration regardless of whether or not they are "acting." When someone is described as "acting" in a position I think of them in the same regard as I consider Harrison Ford to be the President because of his role in "Air Force One."

matilda

Thu, 18 Sep 2008 13:13:02 -0600

Airplanes will disappear when we have teleportation. Neither video or 3-D conferencing, nor glorious 3-D Wiki-Google-whatever pages that enable us to "experience" distant lands and cities, will replace face-to-face business or being a tourist. Granted, the flying public might shrink in terms of numbers of passenger and miles flown as new, more expensive business models emerge, but some people will always fly. In any case, Chicago D raises the important questions, questions I don't think Daley has thought enough about. And I say this as a supporter of O Hare extension, no matter what 'burbs get hurt.

Chicago D

Thu, 18 Sep 2008 13:07:33 -0600

Yes, because people will not be flying in airplanes in 30 years. They will be flying in their personal aircraft. The bigger issue is understanding what the increased capacity needs to look like. Are we looking at more smaller planes in 30 years? Will the Airbus massive monster of a plane be the future?

Not_another_username

Thu, 18 Sep 2008 12:45:12 -0600

What for? With airlines imploding and fuel bills soaring I see no need to invest in airports--they may be completely obsolete in 30 years.