American Airlines and United are in a pitched battle at Chicago O’Hare. American had gates taken away at the airport because they hadn’t build back their schedule fully after Covid. This was done earlier than expected based on lease documents.
The airline wants to protect its current gates, and even bought more from Spirit Airlines. United wants to keep American from growing, and even see them pull back. So both airlines have been adding flights.
- United will offer its largest schedule in Chicago ever this summer. They will serve 222 total destinations (175 domestic, 47 international) with up to 750 flights per day. That’s about 25% more than they were flying in 2019 (pre-pandemic).
- Meanwhile, American is targeting “more than 180 destinations.” I get to 183. And they are only back to roughly pre-pandemic levels with just over 500 flights per day.
In a real sense, it’s United that is adding capacity at an unsustainable clip for the airport. The FAA has said this cannot hold, and they are going to force schedule reductions.
The FAA will hold a “scheduling reduction” process for thje airport and then issue an operating limits order for the Summer 2026 season from March 29, 2026 through October 25, 2026. This will occur under delay reduction authority in 49 U.S.C. § 41722.
Airlines have now published schedules showing approximately 3,080 peak daily takeoffs and landings versus 2,680 last summer. They believe 2,800 are manageable.
That implies cuts of 280 operations (140 takeoffs and 140 landings) per peak day, or roughly 9% of the current schedule.
The meeting is scheduled to begin with opening remarks on March 3rd at 3 p.m., following the formal schedule reduction discussions on March 4 at 9 a.m. It’s open to all scheduled carriers, including those not currently serving O’Hare, as well as the Chicago Department of Aviation.
Here’s what’s supposed to happen:
- The FAA distributes a 30-minute period demand picture for the airport from 6 a.m. through midnight. It will flag severely congested periods, and provide general reduction targets.
- They will meet separately with each carrier in confidential sessions to solicit reduction offers and schedule modifications.
- The FAA will review offers and publish a final order in the Federal Register with carrier-specific limitations.
This applies to U.S. airlines only and will not affect foreign carrier schedules.
According to American Airlines,
American commends Secretary Duffy, Administrator Bedford and the FAA for taking proactive action to ensure the operational integrity of the airfield and airspace in Chicago. The FAA now has the opportunity to achieve an improved customer experience for passengers traveling from, to and through Chicago this summer.
This isn’t just flattering your regulators. United is growing more than American at O’Hare, so American goes in expecting that United will have to cut back more. Even if both had to cut 9% of their current schedule, that’s a bigger cut to United. And all of these additional departing seats from Chicago will mean lower fares. That’s actually bad for both airlines.
In fact, it’s not likely to be an across-the-board set of cuts. They look at 30-minute windows and target reductions for each one, because peak times have more traffic. And because each flight is equal (a takeoff and landing) it’s easier to remove high frequency short haul regional jet flights.
Some of the most recent frequency additions may be the ones most likely to get cut. Out of the new service United has announced since fall, flights to 17 destinations are on regional jets while 4 destinations will be served by 737s.
The real winner here is Delta, my sons former employer than wrongly terminated him for obsessive compulsive disorder.
Screw the FAA. Chicago simply can’t have anything nice.
@Kirby F Around and Find Out
@ Gary — Biggest bribe = least reductions.
The astroturf-war continues… (but only on travel blogs… because, in reality, unless and until this results in actual deals for passengers, it’s endless clickbait over a couple spare gates.)
I’m not sure whether it would make more sense to just force ORD to sort this out – but sadly the FAA/DOT can’t seem to hammer /airports/ for congestion they let get out of hand.
The FAA stepping in to prevent a total cluster at ORD this summer is a good thing. It’s getting to the point after a 15 minute taxi you end up way out in the field waiting for a gate. Personally, I like getting to my gate within one hour of landing.
@Matthew,
Kirby is a very smart man and I wouldn’t be surprised to see this playing out exactly as he wants.
AA was starting to grow and UA wanted to draw their “line in the sand” to ensure UA maintains a dominant position at ORD.
So UA adds a ton of flights, with several accounts saying they were hitting 790 flights, all to make the issue come to a head and up on the FAA’s desk.
AA growing while UA kept growth flat was never going to happen, so now all those added UA 50 seat CRJs that were never going to make much money or add to the bottom line force AA to draw down their schedule by 9% while UA does the same.
Their latest additions mean UA, after the cuts, will still be above 700 flights while AA while be forced to drop to somewhere around 475.
UA cuts many of those CRJ flights they didn’t want in the first place. UA will be able to focus all their cuts on the fluff while AA, without as much to choose from, will have to cut more meaningful flights.
UA will protect its yields in ORD, be able to deploy growth to other stations that they wanted to grow in the first place, AA is forced to cut flights they weren’t planning to cut, and UA won’t have to worry about losing gates to AA due to AA’s growth that UA didn’t competitively react too.
It looks to me like Kirby had this all played out in advance and it all went according to plan.
With the reconfigured airfield fielding 5 or 6 parallel runways, how come the airport canno’t absorb this extra capacity? What was teh purpose of all the runway layout rework if 2019 activity levels are roughly the benchmark to use?
This is a wholesale indictment of UA and its strategies and a win for common sense where UA thought it would bully a competitor out of the marketplace.
This is now the second slap up the side of the head for UA after it melted down its operation at EWR and was forced to cut flights.
This time, you can be sure that other airlines including AA and DL are not about to give one inch and they should not.
UA’s $1 million contribution to the inaugural party was clearly rejected.
UA can park about 180 50 seat CRJ550 flights/day and achieve all the FAA needs and more.
NK is managing to successful emerge from bankruptcy, AA’s survival at ORD just took a giant leap forward, WN is doing an outstanding job of emerging as a much stronger competitor, and DL’s A350-1000s are a year from arriving on property with deployment across Asia/Pacific markets.
Anybody that could see through the noise could see that Scott Kirby was a testosterone driven bunch of hot air that has never demonstrated an ability to compete in a real world.
It is no surprise that the UA fan nuts are in full meltdown mode this weekend while I get to watch the sun rise from several thousand feet up w/ a profound sense of joy at how the high are debased. .
Lol @Paul
Thank you for your contribution, 100 KirbyBux have been deposited in your account. You may redeem them for 10 MileagePlus miles. This is the 3rd forum you’ve copy-pasted this to.
Seriously though, the Kirby glazing from a-nutters, and travel blogs is insane. Kirby does something=what a brilliant guy! When something doesn’t go the way it was supposed to=this was Kirbys plan all along!
TD says, “This is now the second slap up the side of the head for UA after it melted down its operation at EWR and was forced to cut flights.”
Kirby got exactly what he asked for in EWR and probably in ORD also. It sure worked out for UA in NYC where they had a 2.8% lead over DL in December, the biggest monthly market share lead for UA in years. UA was tied with DL domestically and had a 67% traffic share advantage internationally in NYC. With all the new aircraft coming sooner than the competition UA has a far greater ability to continue gaining share profitably via upgauging in both EWR & ORD.
https://www.panynj.gov/airports/en/statistics-general-info.html
the spinmaster is working overtime this weekend.
You must be out from under the desk because Kirby is nowhere to be seen.
No, he wanted SLOT CONTROLS at EWR and he did not get them.
He got forced schedule controls which is exactly what the FAA is now doing at ORD.
DL does not need to run the competition out of town in any market; their share at LGA and JFK relative to LCCs and ULCCs is up higher.
You continue to repeat the same drivel that UA will win by size and yet they fly 10% more ASMs than DL and yet generate just 2/3 of DL’s profits – despite having a $1 billion/year labor cost advantage.
UA is in full-scale decline.
The FAA just kicked yet another UA strategy to the curb
TD, “UA is in full-scale decline.”
Poor little TD (LTD).
Chess v checkers.
DL= 4D chess, UA= checkers
DL= largest slot holder in the US but no schedule coordination at any DL hubs
UA= the most federal intervention in UA hubs among all US airlines
DL= Olympic Gold medal winner, UA=Ozempic rust aspirer
TD, “DL= largest slot holder in the US but no schedule coordination at any DL hubs”
And yet losing share in NYC especially internationally where the $ is. Interesting.
you still can’t understand that airlines in the US exist to make money. DL does that better than any other airline.
UA and you believe that flying more translates into more money – and yet real world data says you are wrong.
None of which changes that the FAA just smacked UA up the side of the head for the 2nd time for overscheduling one of its hubs.
They won’t be flying the schedule – or carrying the revenue – they thought.
Everyone except for UA wins.
UA IS the airline version of someone that needs Ozempic
You obviously don’t understand the FAA’s delay reduction authority under 49 U.S.C. § 41722.
https://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?req=granuleid:USC-prelim-title49-section41722&num=0&edition=prelim#:~:text=%22(a)%20In%20General%20.,(c)%20Subsequent%20Schedule%20Increases%20.
I know who does understand this process and is on great terms with the decision makers.
TD says, “airlines in the US exist to make money”
Cash Flow: OCF/Capex/FCF (in $b) last four years
UAL: 30.9/23.4/7.5
DAL: 29.2/20.5/8.7
AAL: 13.1/11.6/1.5
LUV: 7.9/12.1/-4.2
Easy answer to this should be cutting out the lowest seat departures
If you’re a carrier operating a 50 seater at ORD — eliminate those flights first. It’s a clear example of whether the departure is needed or just for gate utilization numbers. If you care about a market out of Chicago, you aren’t sending a 50 seater, CR2 or CR550
Also Tim
are you off your meds? You sound especially deranged
Ozempic and gold medals? what? lol
@Tired, you didn’t refute any of the points. And repeating my point in different forums doesn’t make them wrong.
If UA hadn’t gone up from 550 to 790 flights AA would have grown without any competitive response from UA.
UA added a ton of flights it likely didn’t care about, giving them plenty of pain-free flights to cut. AA will end up back in the upper 400s while UA is close to 700.
So much irony in the AA and DL fans not wanting to have a hub with more than 700 flights while their own airlines have multiple fortress hubs with flight counts in 1,000 range.
max,
no meds for me. I was up at 4 am, in the air by 6, now heading out for a 25 mile bike ride. No shortage of energy in this body or mind.
You gotta admit that the analogy is completely accurate. Rebel and his ilk love to talk about how great UA is but it is 10% larger than DL and even w/ underpaid workers that save $1 billion per year in labor costs, UA generates 2/3 of the revenue. It is no surprise that their cash flow is higher given how poorly UA pays its people.
UA is a fat, inefficient bully and slob that thinks its excess weight is an asset; in fact, it makes UA easy to push around – and in the case the FAA is going after UA for the second time in a year for overscheduling.
Hold onto your thought until we see who gets cut the most at ORD. I would strongly suspect that Max is right that UA will have no choice but to heavily roll back inefficient and airspace wasting CRJ 550 flights. AA has added fewer flights and will have to cut fewer flights. Other airlines will tell the FAA they aren’t cutting anything.
This was all predictable years ago when I said that UA would be unable to grow into the domestic market near as successfully as other carriers grow into UA strength markets and esp. DL into UA’s Asia-Pacific strength markets.
UA has a target on its back for its blatantly anti-competitive behavior and all of the donor dollars Kirby thought he was spending won’t stop the government for doing what is necessary to protect consumers and other airlines that are able to compete on a fair and equal basis, something UA is unable to do becuase of its testosterone overloaded CEO
TD, says, “UA has a target on its back for its blatantly anti-competitive behavior”
What airline were you bragging about whooping up on AA in JFK & LAX? And having the most hub dominance even if most are second tier GDP cities? Poor LTD can’t keep his story straight.
@Paul
What is EWR, SFO, DEN, IAD, IAH. Negligible to no international network competition in those cities. The irony…of you WANTING there to be no competition in one of the US top 3 cities is lost on yourself. It’s the same a-nutters wanting UA to take over the US. The hand-rubbing at the poor performance of other airlines coming from you and your other UA employee groups is disgusting. NK, F9, AA. You guys actively celebrate this online.
And there’s nothing valuable to refute. You’ve provided speculation with no basis/evidence of truth. You even said they “likely” didn’t care about those routes. Speculation. In one breath you claim these routes are worthless with useless 50 seaters. But now these 50 seaters are fantastic growth engines to be deployed elsewhere. Which is it? United has fluff but American doesn’t in ORD. Oh okay nice hand wave.
The fact that you, and several other of the usual suspects copy-paste identical talking points to multiple forums makes me think there’s a United/Scott Kirby Defense Force. Such terms such as “United firing at[sic] all cylinders”, “United rising”, and “playing out exactly as he wants” are used on multiple forums from multiple users. It destroys any meaningful conversation. And yes, it definitely hurts the credibility of your statement.
Please enjoy your additional 100 KirbyBux (not redeemable on weekends).
@Tired, you think EWR, with JFK and LGA right next door, is a fortress hub?
IAD, with DCA and BWI next door?
SFO, with OAK and SJC?
IAH, with HOU?
DEN, with WN and F9 at the same airport?
The vast majority of the UA traffic at those airports is domestic, so I’m not sure what international competition has to do with it. Though SFO, NYC, IAD, all have significant international competition.
TD says, “This was all predictable years ago when I said that UA would be unable to grow into the domestic market near as successfully as other carriers grow into UA strength markets and esp. DL into UA’s Asia-Pacific strength markets.”
US domestic market share 2016/2025
DL: 16.4%/17.8%, +1.4%
AA: 17.2%/17.3%, +0.1%
SW: 18.2%/16.9%, -1.3%
UA: 13.0%/16.6%, +3.3%
Since 2016 UA grew from 102 to 140 int’l destinations while DL shrank from 105 to 94 int’l destinations. UA overtook DL in the Atlantic and Latin America and is larger in the Pacific than DL & AA combined.
TATL destinations 2016/2025 : UA: 22/42 , DL: 32/34, AA: 21/20
TPAC destinations 2016/2025: UA: 23/32, DL: 15/8 , AA: 8/7
TLAT Destinations 2016/2025: AA: 92/97, UA: 57/66 , DL: 58/52
Try again.
Correction: UA +3.6% or 257% of DL’s domestic market share growth. Yikes!
@Paul
Laughable. All of your airports prove my point.
JFK is split between 3 US airlines, and international carriers. LGA is domestic. EWR is no split hub. And no competition in their airport. SFO, EWR, and IAD are all majority US point of sale spaces. Which means United.
Same with DCA and BWI. Show me those BWI to Spain, France, Germany, Italy. Or DCA. People in DC or NoVa aren’t going to BWI, even domestically.
OAK and SJC are numerically irrelevant. SFO had over 2x the pax count than SJC and OAK COMBINED. And the network there is nonexistent relative to SFO.
HOU is not comparable to IAH. HOU to EZE, GRU, GIG? You mentioning HOU counters your complaint about AA at DFW. DAL anyone?
And I didn’t know F9 was competing with your international and domestic network. Kirby said F9 is a spill carrier. WN does give a run for DOMESTIC lines though.
International is where the money is made, is it not? Anyone who lives in any one of those cities you mentions is a captive to UA if they want international. Or any serious Domestic minus WN at DEN. Please don’t play the “poor United doesn’t have a monopoly on a major airport!” card.
Hub market share
DAL SW 97%
HOU SW 94%
MDW SW 93%
DFW AA 80%
ATL DL 80%
BWI SW 72%
CLT AA 68%
IAH UA 66%
EWR UA 64%
IAD UA 64%
MIA AA 59%
MSP DL 58%
SLC DL 57%
SFO UA 57%
DTW DL 55%
SEA AK 54%
PHL AA 49%
ORD UA 49%
DEN UA 49%
all of this chest thumping from the tiny tool ANALyst and he can’t explain how DL manages to outperform the entire US industry in profits.
UA’s growth and size at all costs is a complete failure. The FAA won’t allow it again at ORD just as was the case at EWR, UA can’t translate its size into more profits, and they don’t run a leading airline or business.
DL simply does not need to dominate its markets in order to be as successful as they are although DL has some very choice hubs where it has a very large presence relative to everyone else.
Those who live with their deprivation all of their lives never will understand how normal people or organizations are supposed to work.
bang away, rebel. You only prove how strategically bankrtupt you are and how you do not now understand and never have understood what makes great airlines but it sure as heck is not United.
TD says, “UA’s growth and size at all costs is a complete failure.”
The only airline that grew EPS YOY and is guiding to a 25% increase in 2026. An interesting and as usual, a non-sensical characterization from LTD. Nice try though.
I’m only an economist so what do I know? Why would fewer seats mean LOWER fares?
@Solucia – it’s the opposite, it’s the buildup of seats lowering fares. I wrote “And all of these additional departing seats from Chicago will mean lower fares. “
Agreed; I read your line to mean the cuts to additional seats would reduce fares. Should read you more carefully!
rebel,
and yet UA flies 10% more ASMs than DL and yet only reported 2/3 of the profits DL did in 2025 and is not expected to exceed DL’s earnings for 2026 even if UA does not settle with its tens of thousands of underpaid employees which save UA $1 billion per year.
UA is simply a bloated, inefficient airline that wants to use its size to bully competitors out of the market.
For the second time in a year, the DOT and FAA are stepping in to stop UA’s failed strategies and failed leadership from harming the traveling public.
“UA is simply a bloated, inefficient airline that wants to use its size to bully competitors out of the market.”
Your information is about ten years out of date. More wishful thinking from LTD waiving his widget pom poms. Sorry mate, your dog don’t hunt.
@Tim Dunn the world and the rest of us are sick of hearing you kiss Delta’s ASS in every column. Sick of it. It’s so predictable. Over and over again!
We get it you live Delta. And every other airline sucks in your delusional opinion.
We all wish you’d shut the F up!