June 1 was the day that Chicago/O’Hare was required by the terms of its lease to officially publish its new gate map. Even though the gates won’t change hands until October, the deed is done… though American’s objections are still making their way through the courts. Here is what O’Hare will look like in October if the courts don’t force a change:
Image via Chicago Department of Aviation
In the end, there were no surprises, but things did shift around compared to the preliminary map. What changed?
- The three gates in B that are closed due to construction were going to become common-use in the first map (which I missed), but now those will stay with United when they reopen.
- Air Canada will still only have one gate, but it’ll be E2 instead of E3.
- Gates G4 and G6 will now be common-use gates instead of United gates, but United will have use of them while those B gates are under construction.
- United will now get that goofy standalone gate G20 as its own, and presumably the airline will put Newark flights there (next to the Spirit flights, naturally) in order to prevent the rest of its passengers from having to interact with those people.
- While American has gates K1/L2A under construction, it will have use of G5 instead of G19 in addition to G21 which was in the previous map.
- In Terminal 5, Delta will now keep the six gates closest to the main terminal area at the south end with just one oddball at M3 wedged in between Southwest’s three gates. Previously, the southernmost gate was to be the oddball and Southwest had three closer to that end.
If you’ve seen news reports, United is now talking about only gaining five gates instead of six. Why? It’s all thanks to the screwy way that gates are divvied up. The Chicago Department of Aviation doesn’t dole out gates. It gives out linear frontage of gate areas. How those gate areas get used is up to each airline. The linear frontage that United gets did actually increase from the original plan of 11,326 ft to 11,350 ft in the final, so it’s not like United lost anything in the last few months. It’s just a matter of how the gates get moved around. This is still a big win for United.
How big? Well, why don’t we go back and take a look at what changed compared to the current gate layout. I left off the eastern half of Terminal 5 because nothing changed there. They all remain common-use gates.
So what does this mean in the end? Well, depending upon how you look at it, United gains either 5 or 6 gates. The total the city and United both agree on is a whopping 95 in total. American will dip to 59. I find it hard to know what that airline actually loses, because it loses most of the G gates it had. But it used those as regional gates and now there are mainline ones there that take up more room, so it’s squishy. Still, once consruction is done, American will have only two gates on G which is pretty shocking.
One thing I’m not clear on is what happens to JetBlue. The release from Chicago says that JetBlue gets one gate on G. But the map shows no gates for JetBlue. My assumption is that the “unassigned” gate on G will end up going to JetBlue, which would make sense. This way, JetBlue can flip-flop between American and United as partners as much as it wants and still be close to both of them.
Alaska will now just have one gate on G which is a better location for connectivity to partner American anyway. Southwest takes three from Delta over in Terminal 5.
In the end, there are a lot of musical chairs, but essentially United controls Terminals 1 and 2 while American controls all of Terminal 3… except for G gates which are split up in every way possible.
Now the question is… will it hold? I asked American for comment but did not receive any information before publication. The city did confirm that there is still court action in progress, so American is holding out hope that it can find a way to prevent this outcome from becoming reality. You can’t blame the airline, because no matter how you slice it, this is a big win for United.
Update 6/3: American has provided a comment clearly showing it is not slowing down its fight. It’s long, so I’ll just give a shortened version here:
“The Chicago Department of Aviation’s (CDA) premature trigger of the gate reallocation at Chicago O’Hare International Airport (ORD) upsets the competitive balance at O’Hare….
“That’s why we recently took legal action against the CDA’s violation of the 2018 Airlines Use and Lease agreement (AULA), which was carefully negotiated to prevent this very issue at hand — by outlining important benchmarks that must be met before the reallocation was triggered in order to ensure that Chicagoans continue to benefit from competition….
49 comments on “United Officially Gets Its Gates at O’Hare, But The Fight Isn’t Over”
AS gets a better location, but they are going to have a very tight shedule and lots of delays waiting for the gate.
Why is American seemingly adrift and rudderless? Everything they try seems tacky and cheap, low effort, low cost.
Compete? Nah, let’s retreat to CLT and DFW.
New York City? Ewwwww, run!
Surrender, the American way.
This is another huge and recent failure by their leAAdership. Flubbed their gate allocation at ORD, giving 6 gates to their biggest competitor. Check.
Coming away with nothing after years of negotiations with JetBlue, allowing them and another competitor to strengthen their respective NYC positions while further weakening their already weak position? Check.
Alienating myriad travel professionals and corporate travel executives with draconian policies and poorly (or not at all) functioning IT systems? Check.
No new or even consistent strategy for route planning anywhere except DFW, CLT and MIA (including dusting off the hoary old PHL transatlantic hub idea for at least the third time). Check.
What a shame they can’t dig up Vasu to bury him all over again. That’s sarcasm. Vasu Raja (and America West) have nothing to do with the current foibles and lack of success of this AAirline.
Is this bad Bill?
For somebody held hostage by AmericAAn’t at his otherwise fabulous home airport of DCA, yes. Then again, since I was able to go from the front door of my house to my plane seat in 41 minutes flat at 930 am last Friday, I guess I can’t complain too much about how American (lost its) Way.
Alaska will be fine.. they use an AA gate when theirs aren’t available and I’m fairly certain that will continue.
Well, one would hope.
Interesting that WN gets M2 M4 and M5. But M2 M3 M4 are three regional (or 717) gates which convert to two narrow body gates by blocking one of them. One possible scenario: DL gave WN M3 to occupy better gates at the expense of squeezing DL’s ~40 daily flights into 6 gates instead of 7. A less likely scenario: modify to accommodate 737 at M2 and M4 – maybe M3 had to stay as a regional gates after reconfig and that’s why M3 is DL’s oddball.
Common Use Gate M1 is currently Closed for A/B Rehabilitation.
There most likely will be lots of Jetway reconfigurations on G & M Concourses
Good to know. Closure of M1 will surely give a room for accommodating 737s at M2 and M4.
CF,
The Delta/SWA gate allocation doesn’t make any sense. Can you explain?
My guess is DL is prioritizing gates closest to the SkyClub, which is at the southern end of their allocation; however, they had to get creative with WN as there aren’t enough 737 capable gates at the northern end of T5. The northern-most, oddball DL gate will probably be a flex gate for them as they typically don’t have all of their gates operating simultaneously (based on my experience flying through ORD the last 2 years…)
In the longer term, it may not matter as much – if I remember right from earlier in this saga, Southwest will likely give up a good chunk of what it’s getting here because this allotment was based on data from when WN was running a larger operation at ORD then they are now and they’ll lose in the next allocation.
That’s a great point. The lag in the allocation process makes this messy; so in the end, DL probably doesn’t really care
Angry Bob – I’m not sure what you mean. The map shows the allocation. What doesn’t make sense?
*speculation*
Put another way… Southwest has pulled back their schedule at ORD. What happens in 2027 and 2028? Will Southwest be giving up a gate or two at the next reallocation such that the end game has visibility???
CF, Why SWA gets one gate in the middle of Delta’s gates
Angry Bob – Oh I have no idea. Could be related to aircraft types and how parking positions are set up.
It feels like AA is having a hard time allocating their fleet given their various strategic priorities right now. They need planes in ORD to prevent UA gate growth, they need to restore capacity at LGA following the B6 partnership unwind, they want to grow DFW bigger than ATL, they are trying to restore PHL connectivity to (re)make some semblance of a TATL hub, etc.
Good point, and all this while the small RJ fleet ages out.
Cranky,
Here’s a little recent history of gate realignment
FROM FEB 2025; Spirit will utilize gates G4, G6, G8 and G10 (Since changed to G8, G10, G12, G14) in Terminal 3, Southern Airways Express will utilize gate F4 (not E4) and Denver Air Connect will utilize G15. AA will utilize Spirit’s previous gates L2C, L5, L7 and L10C.
FROM JAN 2024; Aer Lingus will primarily utilize gate H15 in Terminal 3 for both Arrivals & Departures due to Pre-Border Clearances. H15 is an AA gate
FROM OCT 2022; Delta relocates to gates M2 to M11 in Terminal 5. Its eight gates in Concourse E in Terminal 2 will be reallocated to United Airlines, which will take gates E7 to E14, and to Alaska Airlines, which will utilize gates E15 and E17.
FROM APR 2022; Frontier relocates majority of operations from ORD to MDW (No Frontier International Flights at MDW)
FROM JUL 2019; JetBlue relocates to gate G2 from gates in Concourse L
FROM MAY 2018; Frontier relocates from Concourse L to Concourse M (Terminal 5)
FROM MAR 2019; Alaska relocates to gates G4 & G6 from gates on Concourse L
These gate movements are what I can best recall over the last few years and with help from CDoA Press Releases. I’d also imagine there will be some Jetway reconfigurations, especially on Concourse G?
“It’s all thanks to the screwy way that gates are divvied up. The Chicago Department of Aviation doesn’t dole out gates. It gives out linear frontage of gate areas. How those gate areas get used is up to each airline.”
I like this approach. If an airline can (and wants) to squeeze in 2 gates into the space of 1, they have that flexibility. Space (both aircraft and human capacity) is what this is all about anyways, so I’m surprised more airports haven’t adopted this concept.
“One thing I’m not clear on is what happens to JetBlue. The release from Chicago says that JetBlue gets one gate on G. But the map shows no gates for JetBlue. My assumption is that the “unassigned” gate on G will end up going to JetBlue, which would make sense. This way, JetBlue can flip-flop between American and United as partners as much as it wants and still be close to both of them.”
This is what happens when you have just come from a bad relationship & you need someone new in short order.
I wonder if AA will close their club in the G concourse now
Not until they can find alternate space elsewhere. Still the same amount of passengers to service.
Exactly my question. Operating a club that’s not near any flights seems odd. Though Alaska fliers will like it.
Speaking of: Does anyone (Cranky?) know what happens to the old space (between end of H and K) that used to be the International First Class lounge before the Admirals Club opened? Right now, it’s empty. Maybe that gets renovated away during the T3 renovations, but it would make sense to convert it to a regular (albeit small) Admirals Club, especially if G closes.
maybe AA will fix up their dumpy L admirals club now that they are running far more flights from those gates than G (which is a far nicer admirals club and concourse)
One can hope! I feel the same way.
This is all about the near-term during a period when total gates are limited.
ORD is supposed to be building a bunch of new gates. What happens if/when the limit on the number of gates is materially increased? Do you get some kind of fight to the death between United and American at ORD?
JT8D – It is all about the percentages. United has x% of departures but y% of gates. The idea of the reallocation is to make those numbers align. So the number of gates doesn’t matter so much.
if you extrapolate United’s strategy of trying to acquire more gates… then United will be given gates relative to American at a (95 current gates to 59 American gate) ratio. United will run their gates hard in an attempt to increase passenger count at all costs so that at the next redetermination, they can try and seize 5 or 6 more gates each time (or more accurately, more linear footage). If there was ever a place for a fortress hub….
If Southwest goes into struggle mode (moreso than the current situation) and UA keeps expanding in Denver in conjunction with Chicago, they may eventually have the best geographically located hubs in the middle of the US relative to their competitors.
Did you ever get a response from the Chicago airport authorities on how they will re-evaluate the gate allocations in 2026 for FY25? I remember you mentioned that it seemed counter-intuitive, but that AA would likely regain a chunk of gates from UA due to much higher usage given their buildup in 2026 but be at risk of losing some in 2027 and repeat since the reallocated gates would only have 3 months of capacity.
If that still holds, then I’d imagine WN will lose a healthy chunk of gates while AA will gain a handful due to its increased usage and reduced number of gates while UA is relatively stable (probably loses a couple).
Jeremy – No response needed. They’re just doing everything as required in the lease. It’ll be the same process next year. They do base it on 2025 full year schedules in 2026, assuming someone requests a redistribution. AA is flying a lot more this year, so they probably will gain some back. But it would likely be short-lived, because United will start utilizing its gates more fully in Oct when it gets the new ones. So it will have those for 3/4 of 2026. So when the 2027 evaluation happens, it should get more again, assuming it pushes utilization.
driller – Sure, if someone requests another reallocation by Feb 1 of next year, then it would again rebalance based on 2025 actual flying. I’d imagine Southwest would lose a gate in the process.
Any sense of what will happen to Alaska’s ticket counter?
It used to be in T3, when they had gates in G. Then, it moved to T2, with gates still in G (which led to an awkward “gate in T3, bag claim in T2” situation). Then, their gate moved to T2 (end of E, lousy location, especially since their partner is American), which led to everything being in T2. Now, they’re back in G; will ticketing and bag claim move back to T3 lobbies or stay in T2, with the awkward “gate in T3, check-in and bag claim in T2” situation?
BRMM – I have no idea what the plan is on that.
Following up, but I know that Spirit moved its counter to T2 not long ago, so maybe that creates opportunities to move.
all of this discussion about ORD gates matters if you think AA was ever going to succeed at keeping UA from growing.
UA needs more gates to grow; it wants to eliminate AA as a hub competitor and may or may not succeed.
AA can still do what it needs to do with the gates it has. It needs to be able to maintain a decent enough presence in the local market and that is not going to be defined by service to the 51th through 100th cities from Chicago. It makes it a whole lot easier to fill flights to the top 50 cities with connections from many small cities but AA’s biggest challenge in Chicago is the same as it is everywhere else – its service is not competitive with UA and let alone not with DL.
As for the tit for tat between AA and UA, Port Authority NYNJ data shows that AA picked up more NYC traffic in April than any other airline as a result of the EWR capacity reductions and the fear of using EWR which UA said cost it 15 load factor points of bookings. Q2 and 3 will be very nice for AA and DL in NYC.
As CF has noted, UA has no hub in the league of AA’s DFW or DL’s ATL hubs but both of those hubs are far more cost-efficient than ORD is; pushing AA out – if that happens – just means that UA will bear a higher percentage of the cost of rebuilding ORD’s terminals.
If United “wins”, and has to pay for more than their share of capex, you are conceding they will have a dominant share of passengers. In that case I expect their pricing power to far exceed the high cost passenger cost.
Chicago is such a large O&D hub that passengers will be captive.
Driller,
there is ample evidence that AA has underperformed DL and UA in competitive markets and that is true between AA and UA in ORD; how much of it is due to AA’s smaller size at ORD vs. its overall competitive positioning including taking its foot off the gas w/ corporate sales is not clear.
Hubs benefit from scale and UA will be able to generate better ORD revenue than AA solely based on UA’s larger size.
ORD is and will be a much more expensive airport for UA to hub in compared to DL’s DTW and MSP hubs and WN’s MDW hub in the Midwest on top of the megahubs for DL at ATL and AA at DFW and even UA at DEN. UA will pay more to connect passengers over ORD than other airlines will over other hubs – as well as UA at DEN. It is doubtful that, in total, UA’s local revenue premium at ORD can offset its higher cost to connect passengers over ORD compared to lower airport costs for other airlines because of much more efficient hubs elsewhere. Other airlines get revenue premiums in their hubs as well.
Markincal (below)
remember that UA has/had amendable labor contracts for more of its workforce than any other airline which has absolutely boosted its profitability. As those labor contracts are settled and retro is paid – which should easily exceed $500 million (what AA paid) for the FAs, UA”s earnings will fall – even before accounting for the revenue shifts from EWR to LGA and JFK that have taken place and likely will continue at least through the summer
UA will still be more profitable than AA even with all of that but they will likely settle closer to their historic position between AA and DL in profitability.
It does appear that UA wants to marginalize AA at ORD and presumably it’s a profitable hub for UA. However, I’m unconvinced that UA’s lack of a megahub is a detriment. Putting aside the recent problems at EWR, UA is far more profitable than AA which has 2 megahubs and compares favorably with DL in terms of profitability.
BRMM
Alaska most likely will keep their Check-In in T2, as the Check-In Lobby of T3 is undergoing renovation. G-Concourse is not that far from T2 Check-In Lobby either. Denver Air Connection and Southern Airways Express also have moved Check-In to Terminal 2.
Frontier could possible use a Southwest gate? All would depend on CDoA too
I may be wrong (it won’t be the first time), but I’m guessing that all of this will turn out to be much ado about nothing.
After reading the complaint filed by the lawyers representing AA, it’s quite clear that AA has been wronged by the city of Chicago, in the most egregiously blunt fashion. The city of Chicago are clearly biased, and appear to work under the discretion of united airlines.
I fully expect this lawsuit to succeed and this reallocation process to be delayed until April 2027. By then AA should have grown ORD enough to maintain their gates and possibly gain more if other smaller use carriers like Southwest, delta, and spirit don’t fully utilize theirs.
Big picture, ORD is turning into a snakes pit, having to compete against UA & Chicago DOA. I’d like to see AA file a formal complaint against the city for not fulfilling obligation as prescribed by the DOT to be fair and impartial to all operators. Perhaps a freedom of information act and and criminal investigation will expose backdoor illegal dealings.
I have only seen excerpts from the lease agreement published on this and other websites, and they do not look favorable to AA. They indicate that reallocation is triggered after the T5 improvements, and not when the 3 new L stinger gates in T3 are completed which appears to be AA’s position in construing the term “Gate Space Ramp-up Period” (“GSRP”) in the lease. Once the GSRP starts, CDA must wait at least 12 months to reallocate. Apparently, AA is arguing that GSRP is dependent on the completion of the 3 L stinger gates, which happened earlier this year. However, that seems like a stretch to me since those were initially designated as common use gates, AA had its allocated gates shown in the lease for at least 12 months and, again, reallocation is triggered after the T5 changes per the wording in the lease.
What allegations is AA making in the complaint that you find so persuasive? For instance, does it indicate that CDA previously informed AA that it agrees with its position and is now estopped from taking a contrary position? Thanks
Johnny Stecchino
Did you read the CDoA Gate Utilization Agreement? I did.
In addition, recently no other airline is known to have protested losing their gates or relocating, ie;
Air Canada – Which still shared gate(s) with UA
Alaska – They bounced around the most from L to G to E to G
Spirit – 4 for 4 Gate Swap with AA
JetBlue – Which also shared their gate with AA
Denver Air Connection – moved from L to G
Delta – Which lost 3 of 11 gates to Southwest
Back in 2017/2018 AA cried about not having enough gates and the CDoA pampered them by approving and constructing the L-Concourse Stinger and even recently adding on to it. June 30th those 3 additional gates cease being common use per IGC Website
AA blew it by not building up flights.
We can all speculate about what we think but AA does have the right for its complaint to be heard in court -which is what it is asking.
Let’s remember that were was a chorus of people for years that said that DL’s argument that it should get a gate at Dallas Love Field was wrong – and the City of Dallas and Southwest agreed.
DL persisted, the case went to the federal appeals court, and with time, DL got a gate of its own at Love Field.
Let’s let it play out.
I’m still not sure it will really move the competitive needle regardless of how the courts rule – if they even take up the case – but it will be worth watching.
Quotations from the Lawsuits, and experts from the AULA
Section 5.3.2:
Upon the completion of the T-5 Extension and the relocation from the Main Terminal to Terminal 5 of one or more Long-Term Signatory Airlines, the City shall cease the annual redetermination of Gate Space currently in process, if any, and shall not initiate the next annual regermination of gate space until April 1 of the year following the end of the gate space ramp-up period, as defined in section 5.2.4
Section 5.2.4 defines the “gate space ramp-up period” specifying the following:
Upon completion of the t5 extension and the relocation from the main terminal to terminal 5 of one or more long term signatory airlines (“relocating airlines”), the city shall allocate linear frontage in accordance with Exhibit D-1.3 with such assignments to remain in place for a period of at least 12 months (“gate space ramp-up Period”).
Exhibit D-1.3 is a gate foot print, which was revised during the AULA negotiation between the airlines and the city, to show gate assignments following the T5 expansion, delta’s relocation to t5, and the opening of the 3 L-stinger expansion gates.
Additionally,
The requirement that the gate space ramp-up period begin only when the L-stinger expansion gates are operational was also repeatedly confirmed in discussions between American’s representatives and City officials, including Robert Riven (then deputy mayor), Carole brown (then chief financial officer), Susan Warner-Dooley (then the first deputy commissioner of the aviation department and City’s chief negotiator), and Erika Ituassu (then the assistant Commissioner of the aviation department for intergovernmental affairs). American specifically proposed in these discussions, and the City agreed, that the first gate redetermination would not occur, until at least 12 months after the last of the 3 L-stinger expansion gates went into service, and AA thus would not be prejudiced by any delay in the availability of those gates.
0 ambiguity. Doesn’t matter if those stinger gates were common use. A deals a deal. There’s documentation of communication between the two parties (AA and city) about the interpretation of the AULA. For the city to pull a 180 wreaks of criminal level of corruption between themselves and UA.
“The linear frontage that United gets did actually increase from the original plan of 11,326 sq ft to 11,350 sq ft in the final…”
Aren’t linear frontages measured in feet, not squared feet? (Squared feet would be area, not linear.)
Oops, yes, Nick. It’s ft, not sq ft.