Atlanta or Chicago O'Hare

[Curse]

Modern Times scenario, new slot system (200% till the end of the game world), in terms of world domination/statistics (transported pax, airline value etc.).

What do you think is better for that? Atlanta or Chicago O'Hare?

And why would you prefer the one or the other?


Haven't come to an end the last days I thought about it and researches are not this explicit, so thanks for your help.

[GEnx]

I think ORD should be more fun since it supports a larger variety of demands. Atlanta is really a lot more focused on just domestic flights.

[DenisG]

Hi Curse.

With your typical aggressive and fast growth approach, a variety of aircrafts and very good competitive skills, I would recommend to you Chicago. It offers significant demand on long-hauls, will be the central focus of many airlines (internationally more than Atlanta), and will give you the necessary course of action (world dominance).

However, I must say, both are probably too easy (except if you encounter another top player from aws at the airport) for you (too many routes with high demand) and I would argue that it would be more challenging for you to start at a very crowded airport in the Tier 1 category. In any case let me know in time, so I can choose the same airport and make life more exciting for you... ;-)

Cheers,
Denis

[Curse]

However, I must say, both are probably too easy (except if you encounter another top player from aws at the airport) for you (too many routes with high demand) and I would argue that it would be more challenging for you...

Some people thought it is nice to say how easy mode Los Angeles (my usual airport) is and argued with me. Japan dominance in the current DotM is step one, step two should be Heathrow. Unfortunately I hate night curfews and I'm sick of Osaka Itami just after two real days I have a base there So I'm looking for an alternative.

Latest with city based demand and dynamic things I will completely change my starting airports to small ones and make them big

In any case let me know in time, so I can choose the same airport and make life more exciting for you... ;-)

Nah. Two strong players just handicap themselves and I'm usually nobody who likes fightings. I prefer everybody has fun.

[LemonButt]

Some people thought it is nice to say how easy mode Los Angeles (my usual airport) is and argued with me. Japan dominance in the current DotM is step one, step two should be Heathrow. Unfortunately I hate night curfews and I'm sick of Osaka Itami just after two real days I have a base there So I'm looking for an alternative.

Latest with city based demand and dynamic things I will completely change my starting airports to small ones and make them big

Nah. Two strong players just handicap themselves and I'm usually nobody who likes fightings. I prefer everybody has fun.

You should try Australia...it's in the water hemisphere and you will be stuck with lots of long haul and need to build your fleet around the strong possibility of fuel spikes.  I haven't based in Australia yet, but seems like much more of a challenge than ORD or ATL.

[schro]

I've played both ORD and ATL. ATL is stronger on domestic demand but weak on international. ATL's geography makes it tough to run a daily schedule on a single plane to most international destinations, whereas out of ORD you can do a turn to Europe in about a day. ATL also has far more closer domesetic desintations with high demand, whereas with ORD, you've really got to get to the east coast (i.e. 500-800nm stage length) to hit strong pockets of demand. From ATL, there's a TON of stuff within 300nm.

I've also played LAX, and its really not as easy to play as ORD or ATL.

So when looking at stats, ATL would be the easiest to hit transported pax, but for ASMs it'll be easier to do ORD. I'd say ATL wins airline value due to more short haul demand as those are more profitable.

[Curse]

Based on 1981 data, Atlanta is significant larger - much more than I thought.

Thanks for your input.

[Monk Xion]

I've played both ORD and ATL. ATL is stronger on domestic demand but weak on international. ATL's geography makes it tough to run a daily schedule on a single plane to most international destinations, whereas out of ORD you can do a turn to Europe in about a day. ATL also has far more closer domesetic desintations with high demand, whereas with ORD, you've really got to get to the east coast (i.e. 500-800nm stage length) to hit strong pockets of demand. From ATL, there's a TON of stuff within 300nm.

I've also played LAX, and its really not as easy to play as ORD or ATL.

So when looking at stats, ATL would be the easiest to hit transported pax, but for ASMs it'll be easier to do ORD. I'd say ATL wins airline value due to more short haul demand as those are more profitable.

+1 . Look at the schedules for ORD and ATL in Real Life and you will see a difference in the 2. United/ Continental and American dominate ORD while ATL is Delta's biggest Hub.

In terms of International Demand, ORD has lots of flights to the following:
Europe- Esp LHR (#1 intl destination) ,Frankfurt (#2), Paris, etc
Asia - Tokyo
Canada - Toronto+ Montreal
Mexico

There are some places that have no direct intl flights from O'Hare;
Central America (except for El Salvador - TACA runs a 3 am flight to there)
Parts of the Carribean
Parts of South America.
Africa

Now compare this international market  to ATL's, Which is closer to Latin America:
South/Central America- Not as many flights as American's Hub in MIA, but still good demand and short flights
Carribean - Again not as much as MIA, but still a good amount of flights.

There is alot more Domestic flights in ATL than ORD in my opinion.

It all depends on what type of operation you want and how much competition you wanna deal with. I usually avoid both of these airports b/c of the insane amount of competition there.