How many people flew out of Chicago last year?

Actually the answer is zero. Plans fly, people don't.

Roughly as many who flew into Chicago.

oops - typo - Planes fly, people don't

My estimate off the top of my head is 30 planes/hr x 24 hr/day x 365 days/yr x 180 people/plane (avg) = 47M and change. Actual for 2014, Domestic and International, is 70M. This is Passenger Volume so # leaving is 35M.

I believe the answer is "I don't know" (Unless you do know.) There is a growing idea that businesses need people who are willing to admit that they don't know the answer to something and will admit that without hesitation or making something up. If you aren't comfortable just leaving it at "I don't know" you could explain how you would go about finding the answer.

Half of the people who had tickets. Chicago weather sucks!!! :)

Since the question was from an interview for a software engineer, the right answer is "give me your name, email address, and office extension and we'll open a help ticket"; then do not open a help ticket and forget the call ever happened

Humans don't fly.

"The number of people who flew out of Chicago" is a true answer, albeit a tautological one. It requires no specifics and takes into account not only the zero ("people don't fly") answer but many of the other responses above as well, some of which may be off a few degrees (for example, even people who had boarding passes and got on board might not actually have completed their flight, and not everyone who flies in flies out, etc.). This tautological answer, though, because the context is an interview, is likely to be perceived as flip and would probably get the answerer lumped in with the people who answer zero—the "if the person says zero, he or she is automatically out of the running" scenario mentioned above. Although to use a tautology or to answer "zero" probably won't succeed if done directly, such things can be embedded within one or more linguistic frames, including hypotheticals—ifs. ("If you wanted a tautological answer, I could say XYZ" or "Assuming you're not being literal about people flying and you're interested in finding out ABC about me, then XYZ.") Another way of approaching the question—a way that in fact is a demonstration of your strategy for relating to questions, an answer in itself—is to ask a question in return (such as one that probes for more detail—"Does that include private planes as well as commercial carriers, and blimps, helicopters, and so on?"), which invisibly begins to shift the dynamic of the interview (now you're the one asking the questions). Perhaps a better-quality question than asking for details about the content of the question would be to notch it up a level and ask the questioner something that seeks to discern his or her underlying purpose in asking the question. By doing so, the sterile, impersonal nature of the question is transcended and a personal exchange comes into play between interviewer and interviewee-cum-interviewer. The question you invent is up to you—how brilliant can you be at having the other person be brilliant?

Under their own power: zero. via airplane: 139,345,887.5 people.

Just one...but he was sucked into an airplane's engine in-flight and no one will ever know how he accomplished human flight.

I am not sure that data exists because of private aircraft also coming and going. If the FAA or airport authorities have that data, combined with passenger data, I could probably research it and find out. Do parachutist count too?

Do witches count as people? Oh wait, witches don't fly. Brooms fly.

I have no idea. I guess the interview thing to say would be "I can find out for you though" but honestly, isn't my time best spent on something else?

I don't know, but if it's necessary for me to know this, I can certainly find out. Why is this important for me to know?

I don't know, but if you gave me some time on the internet, I could find out

None, . Airplanes fly people ride

Only one, I can even tell the name to you on my first day.

Everyone who boarded a departing flight.

For the folks doing the math: there's more than one airport in Chicago. Adjust accordingly.

I'd guess: 4 minute FAA separation mandate 737 the most common = 120 ppl Hours of operation = 6am-12pm (abatement) 365 days 6 runways (double triangle for busy airports) 6 runways x ((18h x 60min/hr)/4min per plane) x 120 ppl x 365 days = 70.956M ppl total. As others said, half those are flying out, so 35.478M ppl But I'm an aviation nut, so that's more than the average bear.

None. Technically, there are no airports "in" Chicago. They're in the suburbs.

The calculation is a bit tricky, if you really want to know it: It is relatively proportional to the number of Bags (luggage) carried out of Chicago. Please provide me the database, I would come up with an answer. Note: For precise number you need to also include the handbag. Regards, Abhi

1.5 as many that flew in

As many as those who flew in Chicago

Well, don't ask the airlines. No one knows what the hell's going on at ORD

This is not an oddball question at all but a classic in job interviews for aspiring consultants. The question is testing your problem solving skills rather than your knowledge and the answer is of no real importance as long as your way of getting to it is conclusive. The obvious "people don't fly, planes do" may be good for a quick laugh but unless you follow up with a real answer, you're out.

The same number of boarding passes given out

Why the crap would we have to estimate it when the information would be available from secondary sources....google it

Was the Birdman movie set in Chicago?

Zero.

As many as had reached to Chicago through airplanes.

Zero. People cannot fly.

Flying's the easy part. Anything can fly if you put a big enough engine on it. So, maybe 1 or 2? Doubt any are still alive, though. The landing is the tricky part.

Unless I missed out on that Fox News Special. I'd have to give a resounding "ZERO!" People don't fly!

Besides Superman probably nobody else.

None. People can't fly.

Zero. People can't fly...no wings.

Zero. People can't fly...no wings

People can't fly

as many people who booked flights through Chicago.

One guy : RKELLY. He is the only human being who believes he can fly.

Approximately the same number that flew in

Google for 1st estimate and then dig in deeper if this would be a significant information to a Project.

None, people are incapable of flying.

None people are incapable of flying.

No one flew out of Chicago last year, because people do not have wings.

No one. People do not have wings.

I would google it.

Those people flew out of chicago who have bought air-plane ticket.

They all did.

With Air Canada, twice as many as their luggage.

Zero people flew out of Chicago. People can't fly.

probably none

I don't know, but boy were their arms tired. (ba-doom ching!)

30.9 million

if everyone that answered took a work place hour to answer this one question we would of wasted $2268 dollars based on national averages of software engineers

0 commercial passengers because O'Hare is not located in Chicago city limits at least none of it's runways are.

As many as the number of people that never came back to Chicago.

Definitely not all of them...

All of them did, they couldn't find any good movies to rent from RedBox.

People can not fly, however planes can.

You are obviously not supposed to know the answer to this question. It is more of a way to gauge how you would determine the scope of a problem and work your way from no knowledge to being able to put together a solution to figure it out.

none. people can't fly

None unless "Chicagoans" have wings.

Considering that humans fly after sitting in plane, I say it is 1 million. To check it, verify the database yourself.

What is the relevance of the question to the job being applied for?