Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Never said the airport itself makes it more "iconic". I said Chicago's O'Hare is the second busiest airport in the country, and serves more passengers per year than LA. Woodward wants to bring up false information about airports, I'm merely correcting him.
My issue is if you had simply said that, it would be true and okay, but that's not all you said. You had to especially overstate and hyperbolize the comparison between O'Hare and LAX by saying LAX doesn't even come close to O'Hare (when it actually does).
Quote:
Originally Posted by ColdAilment
I think the cultural vibes between the two cities are very stark. While a lot of Chicagoans have a slight accent that sets them apart, a history of some of the most famous gangsters, the most modern and second largest skyline in the country, high end shopping only eclipsed by 5th Avenue in NYC, the second busiest airport in the world, (after Atlanta), LAX and JFK don't even come close to O'Hare, one of the more renowned universities in the country, the University of Chicago, probably one of the closest equals to MIT in the technology department, and much much more. The cultural battle is closer than a lot of people want to admit.
Originally Posted by ColdAilment Do you have anything worthwhile to contribute to the discussion of Los Angeles vs Chicago in terms of icon recognition and culture or not?
O'Hare is a busier airport than Los Angeles, thus giving it a higher spot on the world list, thus it sees more people, thus it is probably more well known. That is all I am suggesting.
2013 is not over yet, but for the 2013 year Midway is on pace to break the 20 million mark. It's no different than population estimates
Originally Posted by ColdAilment Do you have anything worthwhile to contribute to the discussion of Los Angeles vs Chicago in terms of icon recognition and culture or not?
O'Hare is a busier airport than Los Angeles, thus giving it a higher spot on the world list, thus it sees more people, thus it is probably more well known. That is all I am suggesting.
2013 is not over yet, but for the 2013 year Midway is on pace to break the 20 million mark. It's no different than population estimates
Well?
Atlanta must be more cultural and iconic than LA or Chi, since it's airport is more frequented. That sounds like a good basis for a logical argument.
My issue is if you had simply said that, it would be true and okay, but that's not all you said. You had to especially overstate and hyperbolize the comparison between O'Hare and LAX by saying LAX doesn't even come close to O'Hare (when it actually does).
Just to be fair I don't think ColdAilment was suggesting the airport as an argument for making Chicago more iconic. He only indicated the fact that O'Hare is busier than LAX. Now based on last year's 2012 count on city system airports according to Wikipedia and Airports Council International, Chicago (O'Hare/Midway etc) was busier of LA (LAX, Long Bch.etc) . When comes to the "complete" 2013 numbers we won't know the final result until the end of the year so there's no point in jumping to any conclusions here.
Let's establish these two facts
Busiest city airport systems by passenger traffic 2012:
Chicago metro was busier than LA metro
Source:
Chicago ranked ahead of LA in 2012 (final totals). Now keep in mind the 2013 statistics (partial year) only accounts for the totals according to the Airports Council International's year-to-date figures (January – May) are as follows which are not current figures as of now. We won't know what the final totals are until the end of the year when Wikipedia recieves final end of year data from Airports Council International as an update since the partial year for 2013 Jan-May are inconclusive.
Just to be fair I don't think ColdAilment was suggesting the airport as an argument for making Chicago more iconic. He only indicated the fact that O'Hare is busier than LAX. Now based on last year's 2012 count on city system airports according to Wikipedia and Airports Council International, Chicago (O'Hare/Midway etc) was busier of LA (LAX, Long Bch.etc) . When comes to the "complete" 2013 numbers we won't know the final result until the end of the year so there's no point in jumping to any conclusions here.
Let's establish these two facts
Busiest city airport systems by passenger traffic 2012:
Chicago metro was busier than LA metro
Source:
Chicago ranked ahead of LA in 2012 (final totals). Now keep in mind the 2013 statistics (partial year) only accounts for the totals according to the Airports Council International's year-to-date figures (January – May) are as follows which are not current figures as of now. We won't know what the final totals are until the end of the year when Wikipedia recieves final end of year data from Airports Council International as an update since the partial year for 2013 Jan-May are inconclusive.
Ok then why even bring it up? What was his intentions?
Ok then why even bring it up? What was his intentions?
He was only responding Woodward's post. Woodward claiming LA total city airport system having far more passenger traffic than the Chicago area airports is not true even though he was correct about NYC. Chicago metro was busier than LA metro. We won't know the actual final numbers until the end of the year.
Originally Posted by Woodward1 View Post
Because Chicago only has one big airport, and because Chicago, like Atlanta, is a big transfer hub. Places like NYC and LA have far more airport traffic, it's just divided into more airports, and it tends to be destination traffic rather than more transfers, as in Chicago and Atlanta.
And you're wrong anyways about overall airport traffic. LAX does come close to ORD. And JFK destroys ORD in terms of international traffic and % destination traffic.
He was only responding Woodward's post. Woodward claiming LA total city airport system having far more traffic than the Chicago area is not true even though he was correct about NYC. Chicago metro was busier than LA metro. We won't know the actual final numbers until the end of the year.
How much of that is international vs domestic? I feel that LA is more of a destination city rather than a transfer/connection city which I feel Chicago is.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
