American has revealed plans to resume its longest domestic route, which will offer travelers in Chicago a warm winter getaway.
In this post:
American’s Chicago to Honolulu route resumes in late 2025
American has announced a moderate expansion out of Chicago, with the most significant addition being a new route between Chicago (ORD) and Honolulu (HNL). As of October 26, 2025, the airline will operate the route with a Boeing 787-8. These planes are configured with 234 seats, including 20 business class seats, 28 premium economy seats, and 186 economy seats.
Frequencies haven’t yet been announced, but my guess is that this will be a daily, winter seasonal route. American last operated this route up until 2021. I’ll be sure to provide an update once the flight goes on sale, as we should then have all the details, including the schedule.
At 4,243 miles, this will be American’s longest domestic route. American’s current longest domestic route is from Dallas (DFW) to Honolulu, which is around 500 miles shorter. In the past, American also operated a route from Charlotte (CLT) to Honolulu, which was even longer, at 4,678 miles, but no longer operates.
This seems like a pretty safe route addition
All of the “big three” US carriers have the same issue when it comes to their wide body jets — they have very strong demand across the Atlantic in summer, but then have to figure out where to fly their wide body jets as profitably as possible in winter.
Obviously there’s some demand to the South Pacific, South America, etc., but there’s just not as much high yield demand as in summer. In that sense, Chicago to Honolulu seems like a safe route addition, since there’s always demand for a warm winter getaway for those in cold climates.
Admittedly yields aren’t quite as high on these routes as they would be across the Atlantic in summer (Honolulu is further from Chicago than London), but still, this is probably as good as it gets.
It’s interesting to see American bringing back a route out of Chicago, given that the airline has progressively been reducing its presence there over the years. Going back many years, American and United competed pretty closely in Chicago, while nowadays, United’s presence is materially larger. Not only that, but United continues to invest and expand in Chicago, while American has mostly been pulling back.
Clearly these latest route additions counter that trend. American’s other newly announced destinations out of Chicago include Bismarck (BIS), Boise (BOI), Colorado Springs (COS), Halifax (YHZ), and Hyannis (HYA), and Spokane (GEG).
Bottom line
As of late October 2025, American will resume service between Chicago and Honolulu, for the first time in over four years. It’s cool to see this route return, especially given how Chicago hasn’t really been a focus for the airline. I’ll be sure to report back when the route goes on sale.
What do you make of American resuming Chicago to Honolulu flights?
Good one, AA !
Takes me right back to the very early 1970's (1970-1) when AA launched international South Pacific services for the first time.
AA ran AA201 / 202 as SYD-NAN-HNL-ORD-JFK 4 days a week from SYD as well as AKL-NAN-HNL-ORD-JFK on the remaining 3 days - using the same flight numbers to both SYD and AKL. The reason for launching the ORD-HNL (and vv) sector was strategic, since AA, at the time, had...
Good one, AA !
Takes me right back to the very early 1970's (1970-1) when AA launched international South Pacific services for the first time.
AA ran AA201 / 202 as SYD-NAN-HNL-ORD-JFK 4 days a week from SYD as well as AKL-NAN-HNL-ORD-JFK on the remaining 3 days - using the same flight numbers to both SYD and AKL. The reason for launching the ORD-HNL (and vv) sector was strategic, since AA, at the time, had no West Coast access routes (LAX / SFO) to HNL for international services. JFK-SYD and AKL was run on a B707 LuxuryLiner with First and Coach (before the invention of Business Class).
Over the next few years, AA developed the route to daily SYD and daily AKL, added MEL and made NAN almost a 'mini'-hub outpost. On the mainland, AA also introduced STL-HNL-STL as an additional 'feeder' route with connections to JFK etc.
For me, its great to see this small homage to South Pacific service return - even as a seasonal service.
Since most Australia-US mainland service is now non-stop (SYD/MEL-LAX/SFO or SYD/MEL-DFW), I would suggest that AA may well benefit from Aussies wishing to break their US journey in HNL - and then onwards to the mid-west / East Coast. SYD-HNL is 11 hours approx and HNL-ORD is similar. Not everyone wants to do a 14 hr SYD-LAX / SFO and then connect elsewhere on the mainland.
AA - bringing back the 'golden' age of flying (well, a little bit). It'll give me a welcome, pleasant alternative to the usual grind of SYD US non-stops.
I am so excited to see this happen. I have a question. How long will the flight from Chicago to honolulu take. My guess is 11hrs and 25mins.
About 9h15m, and 8h10m from HNL to ORD.
Lucky - How does one (or how do you) find out the date when tickets will be sold for this route?
The more capacity to HNL overall, the better - especially longer haul red-eye flights where east coasters can get some sleep on the return. ORD is convenient connection point for a lot of people (even from the Northeast, where there are a fair amount of direct HNL flights).
AA in total is adding alot of capacity back to ORD including by adding frequencies to existing routes. They aren't ready to throw in the towel.
The problem w/ ORD -that AA can see and UA cannot - is that ORD is already the most expensive airport in the middle of the country in terms of airport costs to the airlines. All local passengers pay those costs in higher tickets but airlines have to absorb...
AA in total is adding alot of capacity back to ORD including by adding frequencies to existing routes. They aren't ready to throw in the towel.
The problem w/ ORD -that AA can see and UA cannot - is that ORD is already the most expensive airport in the middle of the country in terms of airport costs to the airlines. All local passengers pay those costs in higher tickets but airlines have to absorb those costs for connecting passengers making ORD one of the least desirable hubs from a financial perspective.
The new terminal/palace that ORD is building will only make those costs higher.
ORD, when the new terminal is in place, will be much better suited as an O&D airport than a hub in terms of costs.
AA might be pushing back the inevitable cost reality at ORD while UA will end up spending hundreds of millions of dollars per year to connect millions of passengers through ORD that can more efficiently and economically connect at other airports including MDW, MSP, DTW as well as airports further south including ATL and DFW and even DEN and SLC to the west.
Well said Vasu.
"The problem w/ ORD -that AA can see and UA cannot"
More hyperbole from the DL echo chamber.
the only thing that DL has to do with the subject is that it figured out decades ago the importance of building high capacity, efficient airports to use for connecting traffic at its interior US hubs.
AA has it with DFW but w/ higher human costs to run that hub due to how spread out the terminals are and AA has a cheap but way-too-small hub at CLT.
The AirShow just highlighted how small UA's...
the only thing that DL has to do with the subject is that it figured out decades ago the importance of building high capacity, efficient airports to use for connecting traffic at its interior US hubs.
AA has it with DFW but w/ higher human costs to run that hub due to how spread out the terminals are and AA has a cheap but way-too-small hub at CLT.
The AirShow just highlighted how small UA's mid-continent hubs are relative to ATL for DL and DFW for AA.
UA is working to fix their small mid-continent hub problem but it comes at huge facilities costs.
and ORD's cost per enplaned passenger makes it the most costly interior US large hub and the cost will keep going up.
East of the Rockies, AA has CLT and DFW, DL has twin hubs at MSP and DTW on top of ATL but UA has to hope that AA will fail at ORD but can only obtain dominance of Chicago but running millions of connecting passengers through ORD at very high costs which UA has to absorb.
All AA has to do is maintain its presence in the local market - which has slipped - but AA does not need to pay for near as much of the massive ORD costs that UA will have to pay
No one is going to fly ORD/MDW-XYZ-HNL when they can simply fly ORD-HNL. That includes Milwaukee catchment area as well.
100% jacobin77.
No one in Chicago is looking to fly through DFW, CLT, PHL (especially the disaster that is DFW) when UAL can take them direct.
As to the cost per deplaned passenger, if you want to make money you have to spend money. Chicago is a big market, small thinking gets you unemployed (see Vasu Raja) and upset shareholders (see AAL)...
chester,
the concept that you are not grasping is that passengers going from ABC to XYZ - cities which do not have flights except to airline hubs - don't care where they connect. They are simply choosing to get from ABC to XYZ.
The cost for airlines is massively different depending on where they hub.
AA and UA are battling it out for the local market. Only UA feels the need to throw tons...
chester,
the concept that you are not grasping is that passengers going from ABC to XYZ - cities which do not have flights except to airline hubs - don't care where they connect. They are simply choosing to get from ABC to XYZ.
The cost for airlines is massively different depending on where they hub.
AA and UA are battling it out for the local market. Only UA feels the need to throw tons of extra capacity into the market which will be used not just by connecting passengers but by economy basic passengers. It is quite notable how UA execs have talked about high airport costs in the NE and why it doesn't work for ULCCs but UA is doing the same thing at ORD.
ORD is simply a much higher cost airport than competitive hubs including MDW, DTW and MSP on either side of Chicago, and ATL and DFW as megahubs further away.
It doesn't matter how many gates UA has, it will cost them more to carry connecting passengers via ORD than it will for other airlines via other hubs.
AA is also launching flights between Chicago and Naples, Italy! That seems to be the most interesting route announcement in that press release for me. AA will be the only airline flying that route nonstop.
AA is also launching flights between ORD and Madrid, as well as to Halifax, Canada using an E175!
The Naples flight was announced a few months ago and just repeated here, which is why, as exciting as it is (and I do agree that it's exciting) it isn't getting a lot of press time in Ben's article.
Not easy for AA to be going up on this route against the US’ most premium airline, United.
Correct - I would not call this a new route - but reinstatement of a previous route. I flew the DC10 ORD-HNL many times.
I'm rather curious if UA will now designate their longhaul Hawaii flights as Polaris from EWR/IAH/ORD (maybe DEN?) for upgraded service and club access. The AA Hawaii flights on a widebody are designated flagship so they get access to the lounge and better service, etc
I believe United is the outlier here as DL designates longhaul widebody hawaii flights as Delta One as well giving the onboard service an upgrade from ATL but also lounge...
I'm rather curious if UA will now designate their longhaul Hawaii flights as Polaris from EWR/IAH/ORD (maybe DEN?) for upgraded service and club access. The AA Hawaii flights on a widebody are designated flagship so they get access to the lounge and better service, etc
I believe United is the outlier here as DL designates longhaul widebody hawaii flights as Delta One as well giving the onboard service an upgrade from ATL but also lounge access in JFK.
Seems like a cheap change for United to do, but I also doubt many Hawaii travelers are basing their ticket purchase on Flagship/Polaris/D1 vs loyalty/Upgrades/miles/price
haha you must be joking. United doesn't even brand their longer Hawaii flights as Polaris.
IMO the catchment + connections will be more than enough for two carriers.
As I recall, the longest domestic flight of any airline is BOS-HNL (on HA & DL) which sounds torturous.
Like, I get the benefit here (to both AA and tourists) but... I'd rather take a breather at the west coast.
BOS-HNL tortuous? Pfft, gimme a break, 10 hours is short-haul!
the perk of doing the longer non-stop flight vs. the west coast connection is getting a more comfortable ride especially when you're flying AA. i'd take a 787 or 777 with more seat cushioning and IFE over a A321 any day!
"BOS-HNL (on HA & DL) which sounds torturous."
What is this, 1950? BOS-HNL is shorter than every single Asian flight out of both LAX and SFO.
Hardly novel in length at all, in today's age, or even a half century ago.
Torturous? You are joking. What a wuss you are mate. That's nothing.
I did this route as a 7 year old in 1994 on a DC-10! It was way harder to entertain yourself on a plane back then
Interesting route from Europe to Hawaii. Weather delays more of a risk than LAX, but ORD is a less arduous Arrivals ordeal too.