<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Quashing low-fare competition at O’Hare</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.cdobs.com/archive/our-columns/quashing-low-fare-competition-at-ohare/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.cdobs.com/archive/our-columns/quashing-low-fare-competition-at-ohare/</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 09 Feb 2012 03:41:30 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: George</title>
		<link>http://www.cdobs.com/archive/our-columns/quashing-low-fare-competition-at-ohare/comment-page-1/#comment-332</link>
		<dc:creator>George</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.cdobs.com/archive/our-columns/quashing-low-fare-competition-at-ohare,2093#comment-332</guid>
		<description>Mr. Byrne, I like your articles but the O&#039;Hare modernization is not an expansion. O&#039;Hare was built with criss-crossing runways to accommodate low powered propeller airplanes with low wing loading and a low tolerance to crosswind. Modern jets have high wing loading and a high tolerance to crosswind. Modern airports, like DFW, use parallel runways for safety. It&#039;s just not a good situation to have simultaneous operations on crossing runways like they have now at O&#039;Hare even though they usually get away with it.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Mr. Byrne, I like your articles but the O&#8217;Hare modernization is not an expansion. O&#8217;Hare was built with criss-crossing runways to accommodate low powered propeller airplanes with low wing loading and a low tolerance to crosswind. Modern jets have high wing loading and a high tolerance to crosswind. Modern airports, like DFW, use parallel runways for safety. It&#8217;s just not a good situation to have simultaneous operations on crossing runways like they have now at O&#8217;Hare even though they usually get away with it.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Don Baker</title>
		<link>http://www.cdobs.com/archive/our-columns/quashing-low-fare-competition-at-ohare/comment-page-1/#comment-333</link>
		<dc:creator>Don Baker</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.cdobs.com/archive/our-columns/quashing-low-fare-competition-at-ohare,2093#comment-333</guid>
		<description>Development of O&#039;Hare and the communities around O&#039;Hare actually never took into account the kind of expansion Mayor Daley strong armed through the Illinois legislature. George, I am sure Bensenville and those with relatives buried at St Johannes cemetary will be very surprised to hear this is not an expansion.

Also if this is not an expansion I wonder why Quick Take Authority was necessary.



Additionally while criss crossing runways may be a problem let&#039;s consider that spacing between the parallel runways is half the distance of what the FAA considers safe for a newly built airport. Also the air traffic controllers have expressed great alarm at the increase in runway incursions as planes have to cross active runways to access the terminals

with the Modernization plan.

Please note that DFW airport is twice the size in geographical area as O&#039;Hare after the expansion.



Dennis Byrne&#039;s artical explains that the two airlines which really control the gates at O&#039;Hare have no intention of adding any additional financing. Add to that the fact that 4 other airlines using O&#039;Hare siggned a letter along with American and United to encourage Chicago to pare the expansion down due to costs and they cannot be competitive with the need for largely increased landing fees to cover the costs.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Development of O&#8217;Hare and the communities around O&#8217;Hare actually never took into account the kind of expansion Mayor Daley strong armed through the Illinois legislature. George, I am sure Bensenville and those with relatives buried at St Johannes cemetary will be very surprised to hear this is not an expansion.</p>
<p>Also if this is not an expansion I wonder why Quick Take Authority was necessary.</p>
<p>Additionally while criss crossing runways may be a problem let&#8217;s consider that spacing between the parallel runways is half the distance of what the FAA considers safe for a newly built airport. Also the air traffic controllers have expressed great alarm at the increase in runway incursions as planes have to cross active runways to access the terminals</p>
<p>with the Modernization plan.</p>
<p>Please note that DFW airport is twice the size in geographical area as O&#8217;Hare after the expansion.</p>
<p>Dennis Byrne&#8217;s artical explains that the two airlines which really control the gates at O&#8217;Hare have no intention of adding any additional financing. Add to that the fact that 4 other airlines using O&#8217;Hare siggned a letter along with American and United to encourage Chicago to pare the expansion down due to costs and they cannot be competitive with the need for largely increased landing fees to cover the costs.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

<!-- Performance optimized by W3 Total Cache. Learn more: http://www.w3-edge.com/wordpress-plugins/

Minified using disk: basic
Page Caching using disk: enhanced
Database Caching 3/12 queries in 0.011 seconds using disk: basic
Object Caching 207/215 objects using disk: basic
Content Delivery Network via Rackspace Cloud Files: c963862.r62.cf2.rackcdn.com

Served from: www.cdobs.com @ 2012-02-09 09:24:26 -->
