New O'Hare runway seeing tons of traffic, and nearby residents ...

You can't live next to an airport and than complain about the noise!

These new planes are far quieter than the older ones from the 70's! Remember those old screaming 727 airplanes!

I have no pity for FOOLS that buy homes next to airports, train tracks and highways and then complain about the noise that is created. These are machines and none of things that use them are quiet!

These things were there long before you came along in your fancy houses and expansion is always a possibility!

So in the end, who cares, you don't like it then move!

What did you expect to happen from Da Mayor who bulldozed Meigs field and half of Bensenville.Remember,it is called airport expansion.!!!

Those O'Hare neighbors newly under noisey new flight paths have my sympathy - but only to a point. If you choose to live near an airport, there's a risk. It's the same with other locations. Live by railraod tracks (train whistles, crossing delays), live by downtown (panhandlers, no parking), live near the lake (strong winds), live in car-dependent suburbs (must have car).

At least a majority O'Hare neighbors can move. Not so for many decent poor folks stuck in bad neighborhoods.

There are over 100 suburbs in the chicago metro area. You don't need to live in the less then one dozen that are effected by jet noise. If the noise is bothering you that much, move!

Ow, my freaking ears!

I guess this is another reason to sell the land to the airport and move away.

Gordon Gecko wrote:

You can't live next to an airport and than complain about the noise!
These new planes are far quieter than the older ones from the 70's! Remember those old screaming 727 airplanes!
I have no pity for FOOLS that buy homes next to airports, train tracks and highways and then complain about the noise that is created. These are machines and none of things that use them are quiet!
These things were there long before you came along in your fancy houses and expansion is always a possibility!
So in the end, who cares, you don't like it then move!

Amen - you hit it right on the head!

So the same airlines complaining O'Hare should stop expansion is suddenly using a new runway more often then anicipated? The same airlines that for years complained O'Hare needs to expand?

I've lived near O'Hare going back to the days when military refueler jets would shatter decibal meters. It's much better today then it used to be.
& stop whinning about how Peotone needs an airport. O'Hare would still have planes & no one, & I mean no one living around O'Hare would ever use Peotone if they had an airport.

KAG wrote:

Those O'Hare neighbors newly under noisey new flight paths have my sympathy - but only to a point. If you choose to live near an airport, there's a risk. It's the same with other locations. Live by railraod tracks (train whistles, crossing delays), live by downtown (panhandlers, no parking), live near the lake (strong winds), live in car-dependent suburbs (must have car).
At least a majority O'Hare neighbors can move. Not so for many decent poor folks stuck in bad neighborhoods.

I agree. Normally my response to an airport-noise complaint is "what did you expect?" but this is a new nuisence. At the same time, when you choose to live near an airport that keeps trading titles as "the world's busiest", you can't expect it to NOT get worse.

I like the new runway. At thanksgiving last year I was 40 minutes late leaving and returning to O'hare on good weather days. This year I was 60 minutes EARLY getting to my destination (it only took 5 minutes from gate to get airborn) and 40 minutes EARLY on returning to O'hare.

Isn't there any data on the on-time performance at O'Hare yet? I wonder what the passengers, airlines, airport, FAA, etc will say if the on- time performace measures improve for O'hare (and by effect the rest of the airports in the country)

Blah, blah, blah, yada, yada, yada. ~violin playing~

ChiB wrote:

I like the new runway. At thanksgiving last year I was 40 minutes late leaving and returning to O'hare on good weather days. This year I was 60 minutes EARLY getting to my destination (it only took 5 minutes from gate to get airborn) and 40 minutes EARLY on returning to O'hare.
Isn't there any data on the on-time performance at O'Hare yet? I wonder what the passengers, airlines, airport, FAA, etc will say if the on- time performace measures improve for O'hare (and by effect the rest of the airports in the country)

It wasn't the runway, your pilot was sober.

I guess this just proves that OHare does need more runways.

"You can't live next to an airport and than complain about the noise!"

Actually, most all of the communities were there long before ORD, mid-1850+. I know I lived here before the airport was expanded, with the above logic… then the airport should move.

However, it is the cancers that ORD causes that is much worse; over 400 people die each year, because of O'Hare cancers!

Don't believe what the FAA air transport industry says, believe what the states say in there study.

Ex. Boston Logan aircraft alone emit 12 tons of benzene, a known human carcinogen, annually.

To put that into perspective, most of the major ground stationary sources (factories, powerplants, etc.) in 3 states COMBINED, emit half as much as the aircraft at Logan (6 tons annually).

ORD generally has 2-3 times as many flights as Logan and generally heavier aircraft (more emissions).

If I were the communities around ORD, I would be much more worried about the significant public health problems it causes than the noise, especially knowing that cancer is not the major health problem caused by ORD.

(ref. for above: Northeast States for Coordinated Air Use Management and Center for Clean Air Policy. "Controlling Airport-Related Air Pollution," June 2003.)

It's called progress...That whole area is A hell hole anyway. People should just move out!

Advisor, communities may have been there first, but how many present-day homeowners can honestly say that they lived in their houses pre-ORD?

Anyone moving into a community near O'Hare now deserves what they get, and I'm not talking the Chicago-subsidies to sound-proof their houses. The only exception in my eyes MIGHT be the ones impacted by the new runway, and like I said earlier, I have only partial sympathy for them since they should have figured that expansion of the world's-busiest airport was bound to happen.

Please continue to keep the traffic off 22L/ 4R. Someone else can "enjoy" the noise for a change. But you do have my sympathy...

The FAA spokesman said that it would utilize the new runway unless the wind absolutely prohibits it. Guess what... if the wind is wrong for that runway, it will also be wrong for ALL of the east-west runways at O'hare, especially after they remove 14L/32R and 14R/32L, which are aligned perfectly to winds from the northwest - the prevailing winds of winter. So, it seems that the "bad weather" runway won't help prevent delays one bit when the winds are directly out of the north or south.

Move Out wrote:

It's called progress...That whole area is A hell hole anyway. People should just move out!

Park Ridge is a hell hole? Nice try troll.

Southside Johnny wrote:

Advisor, communities may have been there first, but how many present-day homeowners can honestly say that they lived in their houses pre-ORD?
Anyone moving into a community near O'Hare now deserves what they get, and I'm not talking the Chicago-subsidies to sound-proof their houses. The only exception in my eyes MIGHT be the ones impacted by the new runway, and like I said earlier, I have only partial sympathy for them since they should have figured that expansion of the world's-busiest airport was bound to happen.

Many of them lived there before the jet age, which is what is causing most of the problems.

Over 98 communities are affected by its massive pollution, according to the EPA, it is classified as a "mini-city" in the amounts and types of toxic emissions.

Note also: People complain about ORD noise from about 40 miles away from the airport.

A world-class high speed rail system would have been a much better option than expansion. It would have reduced flights by over 50%, provided a whole new industry with millions of new jobs (over 400K here), at 1/3 the cost of airport expansions.

It was all about 2 things: private aviation domination (monopolization) over our transportation system and second, whose pocket the money goes into.