American Will Battle United to the Death in Chicago


For decades, Chicago’s O’Hare has been a two-airline hub. In one corner, you have hometown hero United. In the other, you’ll find long-time titan American. Since the pandemic, things have been tilting in United’s favor fairly dramatically and the implementation of a new gate allocation rule put American into a difficult place. Would it fight, tread water, or flee? With its latest announcement, American has made it clear that it will indeed fight… at all costs. And those costs are likely going to be substantial.

I’ve covered O’Hare’s gate allocation rules multiple times, so I don’t need to get into much detail. Post-pandemic, United was on its game. It realized that if it ramped up flying significantly in 2024 and American didn’t, it would get a whole lot more gates. It would also set off a long-term chain reaction that could very well have seen American turned into a minor player. So what happened in 2024 at American? Take a look.

American Daily Departures From ORD by Year

Data via Cirium

I know there’s a lot going on here, but that thick red line is the current 2026 plan. Everything past mid-May is still a placeholder, but the general level of flying shouldn’t change much. For 2025, you can look at the thin red line, which shows how American really didn’t get serious about serving O’Hare again until summer. Before that, flying was very low. That’s when American woke up and realized it was in trouble if it didn’t start using its gates more. Use ’em or lose ’em.

What was the real impact of this? Take a look at American’s percent of United departures at O’Hare, and you’ll see that the airline really took its foot off the gas post-pandemic.

American % of United Departures at ORD by Month

Data via Cirium

For several months, American was well below 70 percent of United’s departures. This undoubtedly made more economic sense in a vacuum, but if the airline wanted to have a long-term future at O’Hare, it never should have let this happen.

United CEO Scott Kirby has said American is losing $800 million a year at O’Hare and would have to de-hub the airport. That is certainly his wildest dream since that would give him an incredible mid-country hub with limited competition. It would be a northern version of American’s DFW hub.

That meant the ball was firmly in American’s court on how to move forward. There were shades of gray here. It didn’t just require scorched-earth fighting or tail-between-the-legs fleeing. But with American’s latest move, it is clearly choosing to go hard with that scorched-earth strategy.

American Daily Departures at O’Hare

Data via Cirium

American has already been building up its flying in summer toward the 500-daily departure level, and that’s with fewer gates than it had last year (though it did just pick up two of Spirit’s gates by paying millions). But this week, American pulled that summer schedule plan forward to mid-February. Oof. American has struggled in Chicago during peak times, but this? This is not a peak time.

Sure, you say. American must just be pumping up flights to warm weather spots for that spring break crowd, right? Not really. I mean, of course it is adding there, but it is adding everywhere. Below you’ll see the routes gaining at least 1x daily in Feb vs last year in blue, and routes that fly this coming Feb but didn’t fly last Feb in green.

Feb 2026 vs Feb 2025 maps generated by the Great Circle Mapper – copyright © Karl L. Swartz.

Orlando, Fort Myers, St Maarten, sure. But Richmond gets 2x additional daily alongside Cedar Rapids. Wichita, Pittsburgh, and Des Moines get an extra 11x weekly. That’s just the tip of the iceberg.

If American disputes having lost $800 million in the past, it sure is trying its hardest to reach that number. And why? Well, this is the textbook definition of strategic flying.

O’Hare’s gate utilization rules are pretty clear. Right now, it looks like those rules are doing what they were designed to do. This summer, the airport will see departure levels not seen in more than 20 years.

O’Hare Scheduled Departures by Month

Data via Cirium

That’s great news except that there is going to be a lot of red ink spilled. I also can’t imagine what this is going to do to airport congestion. Sure, O’Hare has enough runways now, but those taxiways turn into a parking lot on a bad day. I expect there will be a lot more bad days this year. That was a feature of “the old days” that I really didn’t need to bring back.

Despite all this, most everyone in the industry is probably rooting for American. They certainly like the idea of American spending its own money to fight the battle with United, keeping that airline distracted.

As for United, well, there is no world where it is going to just sit down and let American creep back into relevance. As CEO Scott Kirby says, he likes to pick fights where he has the best strategic position. That’s exactly what he has right here. United will lose money if it has to here. It has shown that even on small changes recently, like when it added O’Hare to Erie right after American did.

I’m not sure how long American plans to keep this up without seeing a significant improvement in profitability, but for now, get ready to celebrate Chicagoans. More flights and low fares are coming. Just try not to get too wound up about that whole “being on time” thing.

Get Cranky in Your Inbox!

The airline industry moves fast. Sign up and get every Cranky post in your inbox for free.

Brett Avatar

47 responses to “American Will Battle United to the Death in Chicago”

  1. Vasukiv Avatar
    Vasukiv

    What a great cartoon to explain what’s going on! All that’s missing is “O’Hare” in the background of the park.

    1. Scuba Steve Avatar
      Scuba Steve

      That’s the “orchard”

  2. morselsofgoodness Avatar
    morselsofgoodness

    The conditions that made ORD a very viable two-airline mega hub just aren’t there any more but there is still room for AA to remain a significant player, but a #2. AA’s sloppy and poorly executed build up at AUS, JFK, BOS, and MIA during the pandemic came at the expense of ORD and PHL. For AA to succeed quickly on its renewed enthusiasm and investment in ORD, the US economy needs to remain strong, with heavy corporate spending on travel and heavy amounts of discretionary, premium leisure travel. The US economy is headed for a massive recession more than likely, and a debt crisis and ultimately, is going to be lapped by the developed countries it has pushed into a corner, so good like at ORD, AA. You will need it.

    1. Brian W Avatar
      Brian W

      That is a big stretch to think of a massive recession is coming. There hasn’t been a deep prolonged recession since the financial crisis of 2008. With AI and the massive corresponding build out, I dont see a deep recession. Banks arent overlevered either. Unlikely the US economy which is dominated by tech will be surpassed by Europe or Japan which is based on older manufacturing industries. I havent seen a new $1T tech company founded in Europe since 2000 while the US has a bunch.

  3. Exit Row Seat Avatar
    Exit Row Seat

    Alternate title of article could be “There Will Be Blood”.

    Afraid AA will focus on volume which are false bragging rights.
    Needs to focus on accuracy & completeness (on time departure, customer courtesy & loyalty, and lounges) to win the long term profitable battle.

    1. Stormcrash Avatar
      Stormcrash

      But to do that first they need to secure their gate position. If they don’t ramp up flying they risk a vicious cycle where every year united adds more flights since they have more gates, and that will then earn united more gates next year because they’re using their gates. The only way for American to maintain its gate position or gain more gates is to schedule the living heck out of them, even if it means risking tanking OTP during congestion. They need more flights per gate than United has in order to win back gates under the allocation system.

  4. ChicagoFlyer Avatar
    ChicagoFlyer

    I’m a 15 year Chicago resident and very much a free agent. I fly (mostly internationally) 8-10x a year and try to strategically leverage miles and points for the best cabin possible. 8-10 years ago, American had an OK European network out of Chicago and frequent code-share options with BA and IB. Even before Covid, it felt like AA was gutting Europe and focusing more on “warm weather” destinations. AA can talk about the build-up but it’s absolutely pathetic that LHR is the only daily, year-round flight to Europe on their own metal. When I last checked, not even CDG was daily year-round. Sure, AA/BA have 8+ daily flights to London but it’s a terrible connecting experience. Contrast that with UA and Star Alliance – such a broader network both on UA metal and partnerships with Lufthansa, TAP, LOT, Austrian, Swiss, Turkish, etc to ~15 cities in Europe. Daily! Sure, I’ll fly AA if I can get a good deal but almost everyone I know prefers United due to the depth and breadth of the schedule and destinations. And the fares show it – I recently flew to Punta Cana for Christmas. AA was offering a round trip first class flight for 55k miles or $900; UA was $1400 for the same route and almost the exact same times. And that’s the same story for most destinations – UA always seems to have a 20% fare premium. I look forward to the increased competition but think AA will struggle if they keep throwing capacity at ORD without earning the revenue.

    1. BRMM Avatar
      BRMM

      I completely agree about the decimation of AA’s international network out of ORD, and it reducing AA’s appeal to both those who fly for international business and those who want options for their miles. On this front, AA just compares poorly to UA. In addition to the reduced European network, there’s the loss of Asia flying (on which I understand they lost millions). I was hoping that AA’s build-up would feature some new trans-Atlantic cities. It seems wild to me that AA cannot support daily flying (on its own metal) to, for example, Madrid (partner hub). On the miles front, I would note that the utility of AA miles to Europe is reduced via BA’s obnoxious fees and BA seemingly reducing the seats it is making available to partners.

      1. SandyCreek Avatar
        SandyCreek

        I am curious if the XLR introduction can help them. If United can send 757s across the pond from ORD, American can do that with the XLRs, and if American is having genuine trouble filling up widebodies to non-LHR, Western European destinations in off seasons at least initially, the XLR’s lower seat count should help.

        Asia is a bit more of a lost cause… if they can’t fill out a daily 787-8 to Tokyo prepandemic, it’s going to be extremely hard to get it to work now without Russian airspace. Curious if they can start with a three-weekly service or something, but their NRT operation is limited to DFW now and HND slots don’t come by easily, and the next closest OW hub in east Asia is HKG, which AA’s at best mediocre relationship with CX won’t help, and anything mainland China is flight cap constrained (not to mention the limited CZ presence at PVG).

        1. Brett Avatar

          Sandy – As far as I know, the XLR is an east coast airplane for American, so it won’t do much in Chicago. That doesn’t mean it can’t happen, but it means there are higher priorities for the forseeable future.

  5. Tim Dunn Avatar
    Tim Dunn

    regardless of what mistakes AA made in the past, ORD is still the only remaining true two legacy airline hub competition. AA cannot strategically walk away so it is pretty clear they have no choice but to fight and that is clearly the decision they have made.

    Yes, red ink will flow but it is more than a little unrealistic to think that it is only AA that will see its system margins negatively impacted.

    Having AA and UA fight it out between themselves at ORD is good for every other airline that sees opportunity in other markets where AA and UA simply cannot afford to also fight.

    it would also be great to see a comparison of seats (total and by fleet type) and destinations -domestic and int’l – between the two at ORD at least for the summer w/ proposed schedules. AA has more 76 passenger RJs available throughout its network and those are going to be more profitable and have better range with a low amount of marginal seats compared UA’s CRJ550s which make up a double digit percentage of ORD departures.

    1. emac Avatar
      emac

      What do you think the other fights are? WN in DEN, maybe DL in LAX, nobody’s really contesting SFO, nor IAD, IAH or EWR. On the AA side NYC is thoroughly lost, PHL and CLT are neglected but nobody’s moving in, WN can fight for PHX and DL for LAX, AA still owns DFW, maybe DL takes another run at MIA.

      1. Tim Dunn Avatar
        Tim Dunn

        the ULCCs for one esp F9 in DEN. NK’s pulldown did more to help DL than anyone else and yet DL has said very little about the ULCCs while Kirby has talked incessantly about them.
        and NYC is not exactly a closed book even w/ the slots and/or schedule coordination that exist at all 3 NYC airports.

        UA’s domestic strategy right now is growing to compete for the higher amount of connecting flow traffic that AA and DL heavily carry throughout the US.

        ORD is a huge financial drain for both AA and UA right now and likely will be for years to come– only to be augmented by increasing costs for the massive new terminal rebuild.

  6. Brian W Avatar
    Brian W

    I like ORDs policy of not letting airlines slot squat, but actually use the slots or lose them. I wonder how this affects Southwest policy of serving ORD or if it will shift back to its fortress hub at MDW while UA and AA lose money fighting it out across town.

    1. Anthony Avatar
      Anthony

      ORD does not have slots, and has not had slots since 2002.

  7. See_Bee Avatar
    See_Bee

    AA’s international footprint in ORD has suffered greatly and will impact the upside of doubling down in ORD. UA’s larger ORD domestic AND international footprint can reduce their risk for adding markets like Erie (more connections) while also helping to lock down the ORD local market. It’s still an uphill battle for AA IMO

    Where is AA getting the tails for this expansion? Or is this utilization driven since it’s primarily in the off-peak?

    1. Brett Avatar

      See_Bee – It looks like most of the tails are coming out of Charlotte, though there is more slack in the system in Feb so they don’t need to take as many. But overall, Charlotte is off its peak.

  8. emac Avatar
    emac

    Would AA be doing this if Kirby hadn’t talked so much trash about them? Kirby and Nocella are game theory people, they’re thinking several steps ahead (which CF has also covered — UA has the momentum, and that’s important under the ORD rules), but is UA better off with AA’s mutually assured destruction response (guaranteed gridlock and red ink with everyone watching), or would a quieter battle achieve UA’s goals with less drama?

    1. ORDflier Avatar
      ORDflier

      Kirby, Nocella and many others at UA have become arrogant. They have deserted corporate travel and are banking on high end leisure travel. As leisure softens, UA is going to try to get corporate business back. Corporations have long term memories though, just ask AA as it is still trying to recover from its failed move to minimize corporate travel. UA does currently have momentum but if AA ever gets their strategy right, UA is ripe to be knocked down.

  9. Jeremy Avatar
    Jeremy

    Will this buildup hold in 2027 when AA gets an entire new terminal at DFW and a new runway at CLT (w/ expanded gates in Concourse D & E)? Not to mention, AA’s renovations at LAX for T5 are supposed to conclude by 2028 in which it grows from 5 gates to 10 at the expense of losing the Eagle’s Nest.

    That’s a lot of places that are going to have a fair bit of capacity increases available, and at DFW and CLT places where AA is highly profitable. If the Max 10 is not certified by then, it seems like it’s going to be a struggle to move around widebodies and mainline fleet to monetize that growth.

    On the flip side the DFW + CLT capacity growth (plus the Citi credit card deal kicking in this year) should be able to perhaps more than fund a healthy bit of this “strategic flying” – now that doesn’t help AA bridge the profitability gap vs UA and DL though which is a whole different issue.

  10. BRMM Avatar
    BRMM

    Thank you, Cranky. Among the media coverage, it’s been hard to actually see to what destinations AA actually boosted flying, as even their press release did not give specific details beyond a few examples.

    As a business flyer based in ORD, I am glad to see AA’s build-up; they largely lost my business in 2024 and 2025–a combination of service gaps and failures plus just not having schedules to places I needed to go. (For example: SEA had one daily flight much of the year and, as your maps point out, places like SJC, PDX, YUL were just completed dropped for parts of the year; even destinations like MCO, which retained service, had kooky schedules, particularly on off-peak days, that meant staying an extra night or just switching business to UA, which I did.)

    What I hope AA realizes is that winning back business is not just a matter of the network (though it certainly helps!), but fixing all of the other parts of the airline that are broken. I was always a loyal AA flyer, but having switched a lot of business to UA, it’s eye-opening the extent to which the flying experience on UA is just…better.

  11. Mr Eric Avatar
    Mr Eric

    AA @ ORD = DL @ DFW early 1980’s.

    Given AA’s difficult financial situation, I don’t see anything positive coming out of this for AA.

  12. Mark Avatar
    Mark

    I wonder what will happen to the other airline gate counts in ORD as UA and AA grow.

    Crazy to think DL, until recently, had 10 gates in ORD. I wonder if they’ll be able to hold onto 7 gates without significant growth of their own.

    1. Emil D Avatar
      Emil D

      Delta is getting their butts handed to me at ORD.

    2. O'Hare Is My Second Home Avatar
      O’Hare Is My Second Home

      Delta and Southwest should be removed from ORD permanently. They will not be missed, or for that matter, noticed.

    3. See_Bee Avatar
      See_Bee

      DL doesn’t need to “win” Chicago; there’s plenty of non-Chicago originating traffic that is loyal to DL that needs to go to Chicago and prefers to fly DL. They are fine

      I think DL’s gates are pretty low utilization but no one else wanted them since they’re in the international terminal. That recently changed when WN wanted some gate space

      1. Mark Avatar
        Mark

        But if the DL gate usage drops, relative to UA and AA, will they end up dropping to 6 gates? To 5? To 4?

        There must be a point where they’ll have trouble running frequent service to all of their hubs?

        There’s doing well, and there’s maintaining a crazy high amount of gate utilization.

        1. See_Bee Avatar
          See_Bee

          DL wouldn’t allow itself to shrink to nothing. They would do whatever it takes to maintain adequate service to their hubs

          Really my point is the gate reallocation only works if it’s a gate someone else wants; otherwise, you might be able to skirt by underutilizing the gate. UA and AA can swap gates easily because all of their gates are next to each other in T1, 2, & 3. UA & AA don’t want a DL gate as they don’t have check-in counters, long connecting experience, etc. over in T5. If DL operated out of terminals 1, 2, 3, then yeah, they might be sweating more

          1. Jeremy Avatar
            Jeremy

            Rumors have it NK is going to get moved to T5 after this allocation – if this continues indefinitely all of the cats and dogs are going to shift to T5 which remember still includes JetBlue, Alaska, and Air Canada. Those airlines currently hold between 3-4 gates while NK itself for now holds 4 (though 2 were “sold” for now to AA).

            So agree there is a limit on if AA and UA want to take T5 gates, but just by moving those players you could see the WNs and DL drop to a couple of gates far below their current number.

          2. dx Avatar
            dx

            Yep, the whole point for Delta was to co-locate with Air France/KLM at ORD in T5, build a new lounge, and efficiently serve both its domestic hubs in addition to the couple of transatlantic flights from their partners. They will make sure they keep those gates together.

            Would also think AS and AC don’t really have to worry about ORD gates as they can probably lease some from AA/UA as close partners if needed.

        2. Alex B. Avatar
          Alex B.

          I don’t think DL would need to be worried about having enough gates to operate their schedule. They’ll be fine.

          The Lease Agreement has provisions for all of those things discussed – fleet mix, contiguous gates, relative location to lounges, check-in areas, alliance and codeshare partners, etc.

          There’s also a clause that says the City shall consider “preservation of hub connectivity” in their gate assignments; it’s not clear to me if that’s targeted at AA and UA connecting passengers (since there’s already a clause about contiguity) but DL can easily make an argument about ensuring they have enough gates to run their preferred schedule to their other hubs.

          But again, I don’t think they’re going to have an issue.

  13. DesertGhost Avatar
    DesertGhost

    American has been in a very strong number two position in Chicago for a very long time – since well before deregulation. When I moved from Chicago to Phoenix in 1976 (two years before deregulation), United didn’t even fly between the two cities (and if I remember correctly, United didn’t serve Phoenix at all at that time). The choice was between American and TWA. So all American is doing now is re-establishing its long standing position in Chicago. And the fact that American, not United, is the official airline of the Chicago Cubs demonstrates the airline’s inherent strength in the market in spite of its temporary reduction in service. Whether American’s draw down at O’Hare was a mistake is immaterial at this point. I almost want to see American inaugurate a nonstop flight between Chicago and Sao Paulo. That would send a message to United – even if the flight could potentially be a money loser. I would think the City of Chicago would want to encourage greater competition among the airlines serving the city, not to enable the creation of a fortress hub.

    1. BRMM Avatar
      BRMM

      I have often wondered why AA doesn’t fly nonstop to South America from ORD, given that South America is a strong point in AA’s network. That said, I’m not sure how much of a “message” a GRU nonstop would send to United, since United runs a daily GRU nonstop from ORD (and has for awhile).

      1. Jason Avatar
        Jason

        United has flown from Chicago to Sao Paulo for 30 years, since around 1996. It’s pretty established there. I was always surprised that AA hasnt tried it.

    2. PlanetAvgeek Avatar
      PlanetAvgeek

      AA just lost the Chicago Cubs partnership to Southwest LOL

      1. DesertGhost Avatar
        DesertGhost

        I didn’t know that. Thanks. It isn’t the first time Southwest has been the Cubs’ partner airline.

        1. dx Avatar
          dx

          Makes obvious sense for WN too between the hubs at PHX and MDW. Maybe the Cubs’ charter will be WN’s test of a more premium configuration LOL.

  14. LRK Avatar
    LRK

    I have a question about this now infamous “United CEO Scott Kirby has said American is losing $800 million a year at O’Hare and would have to de-hub the airport.”

    I know we should probably take it as hyperbole, but taking both claims literally:

    1. $800m is a big amount for American to be losing on what was ~75% of United’s departures. Did United just have better load factors? RASM? Something else?

    2. If American truly did de-hub, does it have anywhere to put hundreds(??) of airplanes? In addition to whether it could make money with them… just literally, does it have enough room at its other airports?

    1. See_Bee Avatar
      See_Bee

      For #1, there’s a lot of publicly available data through the government that airlines use to back into OA profitability. It’s likely a combination of the factors you mentioned

      For #2, they could also retire assets. This removes high cost tails and reduces supply in the market, which could also improve revenue

    2. Jeremy Avatar
      Jeremy

      It’s worth mentioning that AA has refuted the $800M figure as a few magnitudes too high. What they haven’t refuted is that they are losing money, but JonNYC leaked that in Q2 2025 AA lost ~$100M in domestic with ~$30M in profits in INTL. Now Q2 is one of the stronger quarters so a ~$70M loss isn’t great, but as the article shows AA didn’t really rebuild much capacity at all in Q1 2025 (which is Chicago’s low point). Who knows what the actual figure is but it’s likely somewhere in between like maybe ~$300-$400M though this is about to likely get a lot worse.

      Pre-COVID ORD was noted as profitable for AA, mentioned both by Execs and corroborated by by industry analysts so there is a path to profitability, but it will take time and a lot of money for them to burn.

      Guess that’s the price you pay when you neglect a market.

    3. Brett Avatar

      LRK – On point 1, United has been doing much better on revenues. They are just getting better fares and people are paying them. On point 2, well, it would probably retire old airplanes and then potentially think about where else it can bulk up. But you’re right, this would be no small task.

  15. Dolphin Avatar
    Dolphin

    Your point about the runways becoming parking spots is very true. Whenever I fly AA into ORD it’s a problem, once I waited nearly three hours in the “penalty box” to the side of the runways before actually pulling over to the gate.

  16. RubixCube Avatar
    RubixCube

    For many years I have been exclusively loyal to UA from ORD. Lately however, UA has commanded a premium of 20%. For years it was worth it. But just last year, I and many other business flyers like myself have discovered that AA is not that bad (those showers and hot meals go a long way). We just don’t see UA as the default anymore. Now, we always check AA and more often than not lately, we fly with them.
    UA may be overplaying it’s hand a bit. Something to watch out for.

  17. VictorKilo Avatar
    VictorKilo

    I’m very curious what the implications of this ORD battle will be for Delta’s operations in Detroit and Minneapolis-St. Paul. Yes, those two cities have their own O&D bases, but in terms of connecting hubs in the midwest, they are the only real alternatives to Chicago, especially for cities that don’t have service on Southwest to Midway. Do American and United try to fill their planes with connecting traffic, pulling down yields in these smaller markets (United’s entry into Erie seems to suggest that answer may be a yes)? Does Delta respond by redeploying capacity from the midwest to avoid this fare battle, and/or, does the situation at O’Hare become so congested that connecting traffic will pay a premium to avoid having to connect at O’Hare, helping Delta to maintain or improve yields?

    1. southbay flier Avatar
      southbay flier

      As a connecting point, ORD kinda sucks. It’s congested and close to a large lake. Plus, the layout of the airport can lead to some long taxis. In my opinion, both DTW and MSP are better in terms of taxi times and airport layout.

      But, Chicago is a great city to visit and lots of people lived there. It is big enough for two airline hubs.

    2. Tim Dunn Avatar
      Tim Dunn

      It is precisely the possibility of overcapacity impacting other hubs that will make it clear that the shootout has gone too far.

      AA and UA don’t just connect traffic to/from/within the Midwest via ORD any more than DL does just that via DTW or MSP.

      If AA and UA have so much capacity at ORD that it negatively impacts other airline hubs, AA and UA’s other hubs will also be negatively impacted.
      UA found out the hard way in the 3rd quarter that there are limits to how much capacity can be added in every global region and domestic without negatively impacting your own finances.

      AA and UA’s ORD operation already has the smallest gauge (average aircraft size) of any hubs other than DCA and LGA, both of which are perimeter restricted. Both airlines are trying to keep from dumping too much capacity into the Chicago market by keeping gauge down where they can.

      AA can exist at ORD as #2 – even distant – for the same reason that DL manages to make SEA work even though AS is larger. As others here have noted at Chicago and is absolutely true in SEA, having 4 more flights in a market compared to the 4 your competitor offers doesn’t mean that your airline will be considered to the exclusion of the airline w/ less frequency. There just has to be a sufficient number of flights throughout the day to win business traffic. AA can exist w/ lower frequencies; they just need to be consistent w/ the schedules they offer and also continue to improve their product and service levels.

      as for the question about what airlines will end up in terminal 5 so AA and UA can slug it out in terminals 1-3, remember that most of the international carriers will move into the global carrier when it is built. Chicago certainly doesn’t want all of the other domestic airlines not named AA and UA to become so weak and small that operating terminal 5 becomes financially fragile.

      IIRC, WN is down to less than 10 flights/day at ORD and none of the terminal 5 airlines are large at ORD so the list of airlines there might grow but the number of flights they all operate cumulatively will probably always be less than DL.

  18. RealityCheck Avatar
    RealityCheck

    I haven’t studied the complete AA schedule up gauge at ORD, but I typically use LAX to ORD as a reference point. Similar to pre-COVID, AA has a large hole in its schedule during the afternoon. There are departures at around 1:30pm, 3:15, 5:30 and then it’s 10:45 for a 5am arrival. So for travelers who don’t want to be on a red-eye or take the 12:55 am flight, choices are stay overnight or fly United. This is not an impressive way to compete.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Cranky Flier