Southwest Airlines is pulling out of one of the United States’ busiest airport, and if anything, I’m surprised the airline tried to fly there in the first place.
In this post:
Southwest pulling out of Chicago O’Hare as of June 2026
As of June 4, 2026, Southwest intends to discontinue flights to Chicago O’Hare Airport (ORD), as the airline will instead focus on Chicago Midway Airport (MDW). The airline states that this decision was made as part of an ongoing effort to refine its network, and that “operating at Chicago O’Hare continues to be challenging, and we are confident we can serve Chicagoland through Chicago Midway.”
I suspect the reference to “challenging” refers to the profitability of routes from the airport, rather than challenges as a result of overcrowding at the airport. With American and United battling it out at O’Hare, the FAA has now ordered flight cuts there.
Southwest currently serves around a dozen destinations out of O’Hare, including flights to several hubs and focus cities, like Austin (AUS), Dallas, (DAL), Denver (DEN), Las Vegas (LAS), and Phoenix (PHX), as well as some other point-to-point routes, like to Fort Myers (RSW).
It’s logical for Southwest to focus on Chicago Midway
The Dallas-based carrier’s history with serving Chicago O’Hare is interesting. Shortly after the start of the pandemic, all airlines looked for new flying opportunities, given how travel demand evolved. Historically, Southwest served Chicago via Midway Airport, but as of 2021, the airline decided to try serving O’Hare Airport as well.
This strategy of serving the major airports where the airline doesn’t have a presence hasn’t really worked out. For example, at the same time Southwest also started service to Houston Intercontinental Airport (IAH), complementing service to Houston Hobby Airport (HOU), but the Intercontinental Airport service was pulled in 2024.
As I see it, Southwest launched flights to Chicago O’Hare (and for that matter, Houston Intercontinental) as a bit of a test, at a transitionary time for the airline. Could Southwest tap into a new customer base by flying out of these major international airports, rather than Southwest’s smaller fortress hubs? Or would Southwest’s existing customer base value the flexibility offered?
Personally the strategy didn’t make much sense to me. Southwest was never going to be able to compete with American or United at O’Hare, in terms of schedule or loyalty. The only way the airline could compete would be on price, and Southwest isn’t in the business of trying to undercut the competition on pricing, as it’s not an ultra low cost carrier.
I also think it’s worth considering that within the past couple of years, we’ve seen Southwest start to allow flights to be booked through online travel agencies. I think that’s also an interesting angle to consider. By flying to the smaller airports, the airline may have sometimes been excluded from search results, based on the patterns with which people research flights.
When you go to Google Flights and search for a flight from “MIA” to “ORD,” you wouldn’t see options to MDW. Has Southwest maybe been trying to see how actually adding flights to the major airports impacts booking patterns? Either way, I would’ve been more surprised if this were a success, and if flying to these airports was the best use of resources (aircraft).
Bottom line
As of June 2026, Southwest Airlines will discontinue flights to Chicago O’Hare Airport, roughly five years after launching service there. Operating a fairly small network out of O’Hare when you have a massive hub at Midway doesn’t seem terribly logical to me, especially when it’s a hub for two airlines. This move follows a similar situation in Houston a while back. The moral of the story is that airlines love their fortress hubs.
What do you make of Southwest cutting O’Hare flights?
With the acknowledgement that I frequently flew out of MDW as a kid growing up (I even flew out of CGX; anyone remember CGX?), I have rarely understood the recent changes in Southwest...
Ben is quite right when he writes that WN is not an ULCC, but without any international airline partners or membership in one of the three major alliances, WN is far better off (IMHO) by lowering their expenses and flying out...
With the acknowledgement that I frequently flew out of MDW as a kid growing up (I even flew out of CGX; anyone remember CGX?), I have rarely understood the recent changes in Southwest...
Ben is quite right when he writes that WN is not an ULCC, but without any international airline partners or membership in one of the three major alliances, WN is far better off (IMHO) by lowering their expenses and flying out of airports like DAL, MDW, HOU, LGA, OAK and similar, so-called "secondary" airports in and around major metropolitan areas. The only exceptions I can think of off the top of my head are LAX (due to the overall geographic sprawl of Los Angeles) and SEA (because PAE is can't handle the traffic, and it's simply too far away from anyone living south of SEA).
"View all comments" is not loading properly...
Lately the comments section (other than the three featured comments) won’t display, so sorry if this has been already mention…
but what about IAD? They’re pulling out of there too. Similar circumstances, with an established hub carrier and larger operation in the same area.
Yeah there’s problems with the comments section.
On the flip side, the strategy of increasing flights at the main airport does seem to be working for them in the Bay Area. OAK is a Southwest fortress hub, and they're also the leading carrier at SJC, but historically they haven't had a huge presence at SFO. They've been slowly increasing their SFO presence and shifting some routes from OAK to SFO (such as BWI and BNA), and so far that seems to be going well for WN (and arguably caused AS to begin to retrench).
Growing up in the north Chicago suburbs, MKE was 45 minutes north and ORD was 30 minutes south. My family would drive the extra 15 minutes when we needed the extra luggage by flying Southwest (when that was the differentiating factor). Many articles describe WN’s departure from ORD as confirmation that the airline is abandoning the North / Northwest suburbs population; however, many fail to realize its proximity to MKE. ORD was starting to cannibalize...
Growing up in the north Chicago suburbs, MKE was 45 minutes north and ORD was 30 minutes south. My family would drive the extra 15 minutes when we needed the extra luggage by flying Southwest (when that was the differentiating factor). Many articles describe WN’s departure from ORD as confirmation that the airline is abandoning the North / Northwest suburbs population; however, many fail to realize its proximity to MKE. ORD was starting to cannibalize both MDW and MKE in a lot of leisure markets. It’s disappointing, but not the end of the world all things considered. Unpopular opinion, but it seems like it had to be done.
They are ending IAD too.
Not at all surprising. WN didn't need to be at ORD. It didn't make it relevant there, nor was its Chicago presence enhanced. MDW is where it is at for WN and that should be the focus.
Aren’t the also pulling out of Dulles as well?
Focus on Food and beer , such as a Burger-King Whopper.
Eliminate all carry-on bags and pre-selected seats .
Maybe NK and B6 and up being pushed to T5 and this gives AA more gate breathing room?
AA must have its 'living space'
Just want to make you aware. Either there's a glitch in system or Atmos is secretly devaluing partner award. It's on flyer talk since yesterday. Seems to only effecting booking with more than 1 segment. For example: condor BKK to FRA is still 75K in J. FRA to YYZ is still 55K in J. the 2 combined should have been 85K in J. But now it's showing 130K (which is the added up value straight...
Just want to make you aware. Either there's a glitch in system or Atmos is secretly devaluing partner award. It's on flyer talk since yesterday. Seems to only effecting booking with more than 1 segment. For example: condor BKK to FRA is still 75K in J. FRA to YYZ is still 55K in J. the 2 combined should have been 85K in J. But now it's showing 130K (which is the added up value straight up and "first class price starting from" on Alaska award chart). So either system glitch moving everything to the wrong bracket/ wrong addition. Or Alaska is doing no notice deval. Can you get clarification from your contact at Alaska? Thank you. Long time reader and a fan of your writing style.
Isn’t MDW largely maxed out - can’t add more gates or expand the terminal any further? I believe this may have been part of the reason they ventured into ORD. Granted they can upgauge more MDW flights to the larger 738s to add capacity without needing additional gates and I am sure there are some small holes throughout the day where they can squeeze more flights, but I think it’s largely slim pickings when it comes to MDW without ORD in the mix.
IAD is also getting axed.
WN's strategy from 50 years ago of serving airports which other legacy airlines did not serve is still valid. WN simply does not do well in legacy carrier hubs even though many of those hub metros have two or more airports and WN has a "hub" in one of them.
WN acquired AirTran to gain a position in ATL, a single commercial airport metro, and they are now down to...
IAD is also getting axed.
WN's strategy from 50 years ago of serving airports which other legacy airlines did not serve is still valid. WN simply does not do well in legacy carrier hubs even though many of those hub metros have two or more airports and WN has a "hub" in one of them.
WN acquired AirTran to gain a position in ATL, a single commercial airport metro, and they are now down to less than 50 flights from nearly 300 at AirTran's peak.
WN might be able to rebuild its product and network to be competitive w/ legacy carriers but they are only partway through the process and the evidence says they, at best are only trading some lower fare passengers which they no longer want for higher fare business class passengers - but not in highly competitive markets.
and the real story about ORD is that the FAA is now proposing to limit ORD operations to less than what the airport handled in 2025. If that happens - the City of Chicago is fighting it - UA's growth plans at ORD go up in smoke and ORD joins EWR as hubs with little to no ability to grow the number of flights which would be a stunning rebuke of UA's strategies.
Poor UA: +36 ORD gates, +14% PRASM, +22% share, +38% corporate share, +40% premium seats, +59% seats, 2x the int'l destinations and 130 new up-gauged aircraft in 2026. How will they manage? Kirby will likely get what he wants like he did in EWR where UA enjoys a 2.8% NYC share advantage, the largest in years. Poor LTD.
pathetic rebel.
Of course, UA could increase capacity if they replaced those horrific CRJ550s with mainline aircraft. Problem is that UA chose NOT to pursue a small mainline aircraft which would be a natural transition so UA faces massive capacity increases and decreased fares.
UA's growth plan just fell apart not just because the FAA is poised to cut allowable flights below 2025 levels but also because of the massive runup in fuel costs.
...pathetic rebel.
Of course, UA could increase capacity if they replaced those horrific CRJ550s with mainline aircraft. Problem is that UA chose NOT to pursue a small mainline aircraft which would be a natural transition so UA faces massive capacity increases and decreased fares.
UA's growth plan just fell apart not just because the FAA is poised to cut allowable flights below 2025 levels but also because of the massive runup in fuel costs.
UA consistently runs the highest average fuel cost per gallon of the big 4 and the west coast is getting hit doubly hard.
Meanwhile, DL's refinery is making serious change and dropping it in Mother DL's bank account to cut DL's fuel costs.
Did I mention that the refinery saved DL $777 million in 2022?
and when higher fares no longer support capacity growth and UA's costs increase because of fuel and finally having to settle w/ labor, all those new aircraft will drain UA's cash flow.
Come out from under the desk and watch the thunderstorms that are destroying operations at ORD today. 356 minute delays. Yikes!
Your misunderstanding of airline economics is staggering. UA and all airlines love DL's refinery because it saves them a ton of $ too by reducing the jet fuel crack spread and spot price.
You are also confusing the separate ORD games. One is the gate game that is quickly waning in favor of the normal profitability game due to rising jet fuel prices. If the later continues both AA & UA will be happy...
Your misunderstanding of airline economics is staggering. UA and all airlines love DL's refinery because it saves them a ton of $ too by reducing the jet fuel crack spread and spot price.
You are also confusing the separate ORD games. One is the gate game that is quickly waning in favor of the normal profitability game due to rising jet fuel prices. If the later continues both AA & UA will be happy for the FAA to limit ORD operations, but the devil is in the details. UA is hoping for a EWR type solution in which they gained their largest NYC share lead, 2.8%, in years.
Put down the checkers mate.
I understand exactly what the refinery does for DL and for the industry.
In normal times, which we are not in, the refinery keeps crack spreads down for everyone. DL's gift to the industry.
No other airline benefits when the jet fuel and diesel crack spread is high as it is now except for DL.
The gate game at ORD was foolish and never should have been played. again, nobody is complaining if UA...
I understand exactly what the refinery does for DL and for the industry.
In normal times, which we are not in, the refinery keeps crack spreads down for everyone. DL's gift to the industry.
No other airline benefits when the jet fuel and diesel crack spread is high as it is now except for DL.
The gate game at ORD was foolish and never should have been played. again, nobody is complaining if UA increases its share and it does it at fares at or above AA.
There is no economic or competitive sense in dumping a bunch of 50 seat RJ flights into the market to destinations within a couple hundred miles with no local market just to "win" at a gate game.
The chances are high that the FAA will be "the adult" in the room that will encourage upgauging and reduction in planned flights.
UA can win share at ORD like it did in NYC; the difference - which you can't seem to appreciate - is that LGA and JFK are different markets w/ different competitive dynamics than for 2 hub carriers at ORD.
DL is achieving its goals at JFK and LGA w/o adding a bunch of share which will depress fares.
and DL still has about 20% more flights from the THREE NYC airports than UA does from TWO airports that DL can upgauge and reallocate to new international destinations in time.
This is 4D chess and DL has demonstrated that it is far more capable while UA and YOU play checkers - and footsie
More flights and less passengers/RPMs because UA dominates NYC int’l traffic. Heck, UA even had more domestic
NYC passengers in Dec. Too bad none of DL’s LGA RJ ops can feed JFK int’l flights.
and you still can't grasp that DL understands its goal is not to compete with the NYC subway. Poor "little underequipped" rebel that doesn't have or understand what matters in life.
DL in 2025 generated more system profits and revenue than UA despite DL flying 10% fewer ASMs and UA having a $1 billion labor cost advantage.
In NYC, DL's share vs. LGA and JFK relative to low cost and ULCCs went up. UA...
and you still can't grasp that DL understands its goal is not to compete with the NYC subway. Poor "little underequipped" rebel that doesn't have or understand what matters in life.
DL in 2025 generated more system profits and revenue than UA despite DL flying 10% fewer ASMs and UA having a $1 billion labor cost advantage.
In NYC, DL's share vs. LGA and JFK relative to low cost and ULCCs went up. UA hads an even smaller number of flights at EWR than in 2024 as a result of the FAA's action to cap flights because of UA's repeated meltdowns because of overscheduling. UA is upgauging which simply says it is carrying more leisure passengers on the same number of flights.
The FAA is stepping in to prevent the same thing at ORD which very well could see a smaller operation in 2026 than in 2025 but you and UA execs will jump in and call that a victory and say that is what we were trying to do again even though they were scheduling for a 750 flight/day operation, 200 UA flights more than 2025 even though most of the increase was on tiny CRJs
Does the subway go to Europe? UA has 67% more int'l NYC traffic while almost half of DL LGA flights are on RJs. Which are more like the subway? Yikes!
Is southwest selling their gates to either AA or UA
not clear yet but they are in terminal 5 so are of little value to AA or UA; WN's gates are adjacent to DL's gates. DL had way more gates than it needed - mostly for overnight airplane parking - so, even if a few of the weaker cats and dogs move from T2 to 5, DL still will likely have more space than it does now.
Good post LTD.